Skip to content
Meat Nutrition & composition Comparisons

Ground beef vs. ground pork: nutrition differences

Quick answer

Cooked 90/10 ground beef is about 230 calories, 28.4 g protein and 12 g fat per 100 g. Cooked 84/16 pork is about 289 calories and 20 g fat, while 96/4 pork drops to about 187 calories and 7.2 g fat. Fat percentage changes the result more than species alone.

Comparing “ground beef” with “ground pork” without checking fat percentage can give the wrong answer. Lean-to-fat percentage can change calories more than the species itself. Ground pork ranges from very lean products to much fattier blends, just as ground beef does.

Three cooked references show the effect

Per 100 g cooked Beef 90/10 Pork 84/16 Pork 96/4
Calories ~230 ~289 ~187
Protein ~28.4 g ~26.7 g ~30.6 g
Fat ~12.0 g ~20.0 g ~7.2 g
Iron ~3.1 mg ~1–1.3 mg ~1.1 mg
Zinc ~6.8 mg ~3 mg ~2.6 mg

The percentages are different, and that is exactly why the package matters. The 84/16 pork provides roughly 59 more calories and 8 g more fat than 90/10 beef per 100 g, while 96/4 pork provides about 43 fewer calories and nearly 5 g less fat than that beef reference.

Protein stays high

All three cooked products provide more than 26 g protein per 100 g. The 96/4 pork reaches about 30.6 g because cooking concentrates an initially very lean product as water is lost. A 150 g cooked serving would provide roughly 46 g protein.

Beef provides more iron and zinc

The 90/10 beef reference supplies about 3.1 mg iron and 6.8 mg zinc per 100 g. The pork references are around 1–1.3 mg iron and 2.6–3.2 mg zinc. Beef keeps a clear mineral advantage even when the pork product is leaner.

Ground pork can be very lean

The idea that ground pork must be fatty is contradicted by a 96/4 product: cooked, it is about 187 calories and 7.2 g fat per 100 g. Compared with 84/16 ground pork, that is roughly 102 fewer calories and almost 13 g less fat per 100 g within the same species.

What the percentages mean

A 96/4 product is approximately 96% lean and 4% fat by raw weight; 84/16 contains four times the declared fat percentage. Cooking changes the final water and fat content, so raw package percentages and cooked nutrient tables are related but not identical measurements.

The label on ground meat matters because the fat percentage can overwhelm the species difference. Very lean pork can contain less fat than a higher-fat beef blend, while a lean beef product can be lighter than regular ground pork. Comparing ‘beef’ with ‘pork’ without matching the lean-to-fat ratio can therefore produce a misleading conclusion. When possible, compare products with similar fat percentages and the same cooked or raw basis.

Cooking also changes the numbers per 100 grams. Water is lost, some fat renders out, and the cooked meat becomes more concentrated. Draining visible fat can reduce what remains on the plate, but it does not turn a high-fat blend into an ultra-lean one. For burgers, meatballs, tacos, or sauces, the final nutrition also depends on cheese, buns, oil, sauces, and portion size.

Both meats can fit into a balanced diet when the cut, fat level, and frequency make sense. Beef generally has an advantage for iron and zinc, while pork often contributes more thiamin. If saturated fat is the main concern, the lean percentage on the pack is usually a more actionable number than the animal species alone.

For recipe planning, texture can guide the fat choice. Very lean ground meat dries out more easily in burgers because there is less fat to lubricate the bite, while sauces, chili, stuffed vegetables, and meatballs with moist ingredients can tolerate leaner blends. That means the lowest-fat package is not automatically the best for every preparation, but you can often choose lean meat and compensate with onions, mushrooms, tomato, beans, yogurt-based sauces, or other moist components rather than simply adding more saturated fat.

Portion size is equally important. A 100-gram comparison is convenient for databases, but a large burger may contain 150–200 grams of raw meat before toppings, whereas a pasta sauce may use far less meat per person. If your goal is to reduce red or processed meat overall, mixing ground meat with lentils, mushrooms, or beans can lower the meat portion while keeping volume and texture. That approach changes the entire dish more meaningfully than arguing over a small nutrient difference between two similarly fatty mince products.

Bottom line

When choosing between ground beef and ground pork, compare fat percentage first and micronutrients second. Either species can be relatively lean at a low fat percentage, while beef generally retains an advantage in iron and zinc.

Sources