New orleans kettle style voodoo heat potato chips vs Original thin & crispy potato chips, original — Side-by-Side | ProductGuru

This page compares New orleans kettle style voodoo heat potato chips and Original thin & crispy potato chips, original — two products from UTZ Quality Foods, LLC, both in the Chips, Pretzels & Snacks category. The comparison is assembled automatically from public catalog data (specifications, descriptions, brand metadata). We have not held, tested, or independently measured either product; specifications are AI-estimated from the public product descriptions and may not match the current retail SKU. Use this page as a starting point, then verify on the seller's product page before buying.

At a glance

Where they differ

• Category (AI-est.): New orleans kettle style voodoo heat potato chips — Potato crisps; Original thin & crispy potato chips, original — Snacks.
• Ingredients (AI-est.): New orleans kettle style voodoo heat potato chips — Potatoes, peanut oil or a blend of peanut oil, and canola oil, corn oil, or sunflower oil, sugar, salt, sodium diacetate, torula yeast, dextrose, onion powder, spice, autolyzed yeast extract, citric acid, garlic powder, natural flavor, paprika and turmeric extract, paprika, natural smoke flavor.; Original thin & crispy potato chips, original — Potatoes, vegetable oil (may contain one or more of the following: cottonseed oil, palm oil, corn oil, canola oil, and/or soybean oil), salt..
• Saturated fat (AI-est.): New orleans kettle style voodoo heat potato chips — 3.6 g/100g; Original thin & crispy potato chips, original — 12.5 g/100g.
• Salt (AI-est.): New orleans kettle style voodoo heat potato chips — 2.1 g/100g; Original thin & crispy potato chips, original — 1.5 g/100g.
• Fat (AI-est.): New orleans kettle style voodoo heat potato chips — 28.6 g/100g; Original thin & crispy potato chips, original — 35.7 g/100g.

Where they're similar

• Country/markets (AI-est.): both list United States.
• Protein (AI-est.): both list 7.1 g/100g.
• Carbohydrates (AI-est.): both list 57.1 g/100g.

Which one for which use case

If Category matters most to you, the two products list different values — see the table above and compare with your own priority. If Ingredients matters more, the choice may go the other way. We surface the specs; the decision is yours.

We do not rank these products against each other. This is a side-by-side of public data, not a recommendation. For purchase-specific questions (fit, warranty, regional availability, current price), consult the seller's product page or, where the product touches health, safety, or finance, consult the appropriate specialist.

Where to find them

About this comparison

This page was assembled automatically from ProductGuru's public catalog (brand, category, description, EAN/GTIN, AI-estimated attribute tags). We have not held, opened, used, or independently tested either product. Specifications labelled (AI-est.) are extracted by an AI summariser from the manufacturer-supplied product description and may be inaccurate or out of date. Always confirm the current spec sheet with the seller before buying.

Disclaimer: AI-assembled product comparison from public data. Specifications may be inaccurate or outdated. Always verify with the seller before buying. We earn a small commission from eBay if you buy through our links; this does not affect the data or the comparison. ProductGuru indexes public information and does not offer medical, financial, or other professional advice.