Comparison
Chilean Cabernet Sauvignon vs Uruguayan Tannat
How Chilean Cabernet Sauvignon and Uruguayan Tannat differ, dimension by dimension.
The short answer
The main differences: Chilean Cabernet Sauvignon has more herbal / green character; Uruguayan Tannat has more spice; Uruguayan Tannat has more body.
Choose
Chilean Cabernet Sauvignon
Choose Chilean Cabernet Sauvignon if you want something more herbal and green.
Choose
Uruguayan Tannat
Choose Uruguayan Tannat if you want something spicier, fuller and richer, more savoury.
Where they genuinely differ
Only differences large enough to notice in the glass are listed here. A gap of half a point on a five-point scale is noise, and WineHQ does not dress it up as a finding.
Herbal / green character
Clear differenceHerbs, grass, blackcurrant leaf, capsicum and other green notes, largely driven by methoxypyrazines and picking decisions.
Chilean Cabernet Sauvignon is more herbal and green: medium against low.
Spice
Clear differencePepper, clove, cinnamon and related spice notes, whether from the grape (as with rotundone in Syrah) or from oak.
Uruguayan Tannat is spicier: medium against low.
Body
Clear differenceThe overall weight and viscosity of the wine in the mouth — a composite of alcohol, sugar, extract and glycerol.
Uruguayan Tannat is fuller and richer: high against medium-plus.
Savoury character
Clear differenceNon-fruit, umami-adjacent character: meat, leather, olive, soy, broth, cured notes. Often increases with age.
Uruguayan Tannat is more savoury: medium-plus against medium.
Where they are much the same
Just as useful: knowing which parts of the choice do not matter.
- Sweetness: Similar — both low.
- Acidity: Similar — both medium-plus.
- Tannin: Similar — both medium-plus.
- Alcohol: Similar — both medium-plus.
- Fruit intensity: Similar — both medium-plus.
Full side by side
| Dimension | Chilean Cabernet Sauvignon | Uruguayan Tannat |
|---|---|---|
| Herbal / green character | typically medium, ranging from low-medium to medium-plus (3/5) | low (1/5) |
| Spice | low (1/5) | typically medium, ranging from low-medium to medium (3/5) |
| Body | typically medium-plus, ranging from medium to high (4/5) | typically high, ranging from medium-plus to high (5/5) |
| Savoury character | typically medium, ranging from low-medium to medium (3/5) | typically medium-plus, ranging from medium to medium-plus (4/5) |
| Sweetness | low (1/5) | low (1/5) |
| Acidity | typically medium-plus, ranging from medium to medium-plus (4/5) | typically medium-plus, ranging from medium to medium-plus (4/5) |
| Tannin | typically medium-plus, ranging from medium to medium-plus (4/5) | typically medium-plus, ranging from medium to high (4/5) |
| Alcohol | typically medium-plus, ranging from medium to medium-plus (4/5) | typically medium-plus, ranging from medium to medium-plus (4/5) |
| Fruit intensity | typically medium-plus, ranging from medium to high (4/5) | typically medium-plus, ranging from medium to high (4/5) |
| Aromatic intensity | medium (3/5) | medium (3/5) |
| Oak influence | typically medium, ranging from low-medium to medium-plus (3/5) | typically medium, ranging from low-medium to medium-plus (3/5) |
| Floral character | low (1/5) | low (1/5) |
| Earthy character | low (1/5) | low (1/5) |
| Perceived freshness | typically medium, ranging from low-medium to medium-plus (3/5) | typically medium, ranging from low-medium to medium-plus (3/5) |
| Carbonation | low (1/5) | low (1/5) |
| Texture | typically medium-plus, ranging from medium to medium-plus (4/5) | typically medium-plus, ranging from medium to medium-plus (4/5) |
| Serve at | 16–18°C | 16–18°C |
| Typical flavours | cassis, black cherry, mint, eucalyptus, cedar | blackberry, plum, liquorice, cocoa, dried herb |
Values are typical points within each wine’s range. Both wines vary — see the individual pages for how much.