Head-to-head comparison

Pork Chop (bone-in) vs Lamb (leg, roasted): Which Has More Protein?

Pork Chop (bone-in) vs Lamb (leg, roasted) is a genuinely useful comparison because the two differ meaningfully on more than one axis, not just total protein.

Pork Chop (bone-in)

27.0gprotein / 100g

231 cal · 14.0g fat · $$ · Quality 0.9

Lamb (leg, roasted)

25.0gprotein / 100g

258 cal · 16.0g fat · $$$$ · Quality 0.91

Per 100g, Pork Chop (bone-in) comes in at 27.0g of protein against Lamb (leg, roasted)'s 25.0g, a 2.0g gap that's noticeable across a full day's eating but won't make or break either choice on its own.

Protein quality is essentially matched between the two — both land in a similar tier for amino acid completeness.

Budget-wise, Pork Chop (bone-in) runs meaningfully cheaper per typical serving ($$) than Lamb (leg, roasted) ($$$$).

Pork Chop (bone-in)'s typical serving also delivers more leucine (2200mg vs Lamb (leg, roasted)'s 1980mg) — relevant if the goal is maximizing the muscle-protein-synthesis trigger per meal, not just total grams.

Verdict

With protein content this close, cost is the more useful tiebreaker: Pork Chop (bone-in) delivers a similar protein profile to Lamb (leg, roasted) at a noticeably lower price per serving.

Full nutrition comparison

Per 100gPork Chop (bone-in)Lamb (leg, roasted)
Protein27.0g25.0g
Calories231258
Fat14.0g16.0g
Carbs0.0g0.0g
Fiber0.0g0.0g
Quality score0.90.91
Relative cost$$$$$$
Prep time15 min90 min

Frequently asked

Which has more protein, pork chop (bone-in) or lamb (leg, roasted)?

Pork Chop (bone-in) has 27.0g of protein per 100g compared to Lamb (leg, roasted)'s 25.0g.

Which is lower in calories?

Pork Chop (bone-in) is lower in calories per 100g, at 231 vs the other's 258.