Fried Argentine sea pike, 300 g

Fried Argentine sea pike, 300 g

300 g

Healthier picks of the same kind

Frozen long sea pike fillet without skin SUNRISE, 750 g 78 kcal · 100 g 60% fewer kcal less salt Compare → A 96
Hot smoked Argentine sea pike, 1 kg 83 kcal · 100 g 57% fewer kcal less salt Compare → A 82
All: pike
100 g and 300 g
195kcal
816 kJ / 195 kcal
Whole pack (300 g)
585 kcal
Fat
8,9 g
41% of energy
Carbohydrates
3,6 g
7% of energy
Proteins
25 g
52% of energy
Nutrition per 100 g and per 300 g pack
Nutrient 100 g 300 g
Energy 816 kJ / 195 kcal
585 kcal
29% RI
Fat 8.9 g
27 g
38% RI
of which saturates 1.3 g
3.9 g
20% RI
Carbohydrate 3.6 g
11 g
4% RI
of which sugars 0 g
0 g
0% RI
Protein 25 g
75 g
150% RI
Salt 1.5 g
4.5 g
75% RI

RI – reference intake for an adult (2000 kcal).

From the product label · updated 2026-10

C 68
Average
68 out of 100 · Judged as: food
Lowers the score
  • Salt −7
  • Energy −2
  • Saturates −1
Raises the score
  • Protein +7
How this is worked out

We use the Nutri-Score method: points for energy, sugar, saturated fat and salt, less points for protein, fibre and fruit and vegetable content. Drinks, oils and cheese are judged on their own scales — otherwise olive oil would look worse than a sugary drink purely for being calorie-dense.

Shops do not publish fibre, so we treat it as zero. Whole grain and pulse products may therefore score slightly lower here than the label on the packet says.

12.8 g
Protein / 100 kcal
0%
Sugar of carbs
15%
Saturated of fat
How many calories are in Fried Argentine sea pike, 300 g?
100 g – 195 kcal. 1 pack (300 g) ≈ 585 kcal.
How much protein, fat and carbohydrate?
Per 100 g: protein 25 g, fat 8,9 g, carbohydrate 3,6 g.
Is Fried Argentine sea pike, 300 g a healthy choice?
Health grade C (68 of 100), from its sugar, saturated fat, salt, fibre and protein.

Added by a community member · 2026-07-11

Show all (8) Every store’s version of the same product

Label facts, in your feed every day

Where the sugar hides, which has the most protein, which yogurt is better – short comparisons worth saving.