Skip to content

Optimum Nutrition Micronized Creatine Powder 317g vs Thorne Creatine 405g

Side-by-side comparison of scores, ingredients, prices and real customer feedback for Optimum Nutrition Micronized Creatine Powder 317g and Thorne Creatine 405g.

Last verified: 07 Apr 2026 · Based on 94 reviews

79.0
Quick Answer

Optimum Nutrition Micronized Creatine Powder 317g scores 79.0/100 vs Thorne Creatine 405g at 74.0/100. Optimum Nutrition Micronized Creatine Powder 317g wins on value for money, side effects. Thorne Creatine 405g is stronger on effectiveness and certifications.

Which is better: Optimum Nutrition Micronize... or Thorne Creatine 405g?

Optimum Nutrition wins at £16.00 versus Thorne's £42.99 — nearly identical ingredient quality (both 92/100) but far better value (68 vs 44/100). Thorne's NSF Certified for Sport credential makes it the right call for professional athletes subject to anti-doping testing, where that certification carries more weight than cost.

— AIScored Editorial Team

How Do the Scores Compare?

Optimum Nutrition Micronize...
Thorne Creatine 405g
Optimum Nutrition Micronized Creatine Powder 317g
Optimum Nutrition Micronize...
Optimum Nutrition
Thorne Creatine 405g
Thorne Creatine 405g
Thorne
Overall Score 79.0 74.0
Effectiveness 77.0/100 80.0/100
Best
Ingredient Quality 92.0/100
Best
92.0/100
Best
Value for Money 68.0/100
Best
44.0/100
Side Effects 91.0/100
Best
87.0/100
Certifications 86.0/100 97.0/100
Best
Best Price £16.00 Amazon UK →
Cheapest
£42.99 Amazon UK →
Price per Serving £0.17 93 servings
Best value
£0.53 81 servings
Form Powder Powder
Dose 3.4g creatine monohydrate per serving (approx 3g pure creatine) 5g per serving
Third-Party Tested ✓ Yes ✓ Yes
Reviews Analysed 18 76

Optimum Nutrition Micronized Cre...

Pros

  • Pure micronized creatine monohydrate — the most researched and evidence-backed form of creatine available
  • Informed Choice certified, meaning each batch is tested for banned substances — important for competitive athletes
  • Zero fillers, flavours, or additives; fully vegan and free from all major allergens
  • Micronized particle size mixes more cleanly in liquid than standard creatine, reducing grit and residue

Cons

  • Serving size is 3.4g, which falls short of the 5g daily dose used in virtually all clinical efficacy studies — users need to scoop ~1.5 servings to hit the research-backed dose, reducing the effective yield to roughly 62 servings rather than 93
  • No loading protocol guidance on the label; new users unfamiliar with creatine may under-dose
  • Premium brand pricing means cheaper certified alternatives exist at the same or higher dose per gram
  • One Trustpilot submission flagged dismissive customer service, suggesting post-sale support may be inconsistent

Best For

Strength and resistance training athletes looking for performance and power output gains Competitive or tested athletes who need Informed Choice-certified products People who prefer to add creatine to existing shakes or meals without altering taste Beginners wanting a reputable, clean entry-point creatine with no proprietary blends
View full review →

Thorne Creatine 405g

Pros

  • NSF Certified for Sport — the most credible certification for competitive and professional athletes
  • Pure micronized creatine monohydrate with zero fillers, binders, or additives
  • Neutral taste and good solubility — mixes cleanly into water, juice, or coffee
  • Well-established brand with a clinical-grade reputation used by professional sports teams

Cons

  • Significantly overpriced relative to equally pure creatine from budget or mid-tier brands — Reddit consensus is consistent on this
  • No Creapure (German) origin specified; sourcing transparency is limited for a premium-positioned product
  • Some Reddit users report recent concerns about quality consistency following Thorne's acquisition
  • The certification premium is meaningful only for drug-tested athletes — general fitness users are unlikely to need NSF-level assurance

Best For

Competitive and professional athletes subject to anti-doping testing Consumers who prioritise third-party purity verification above cost Women seeking creatine for strength, energy, and cognitive support Over-40s using creatine for muscle maintenance and brain health Those already buying other Thorne products and consolidating their supplement stack
View full review →

What does the data say about Optimum Nutrition Micr... vs Thorne Creatine 405g?

Optimum Nutrition Micronized Creatine Powder 317g gives you 3.4g of creatine monohydrate per scoop which works out at roughly 3g of pure creatine. Thorne Creatine 405g delivers a full 5g serving straight up. Both use the same pure micronized form with no fillers or additives yet the serving difference matters because nearly every study on strength gains uses 5g daily. Optimum Nutrition scores 79.0/100 overall while Thorne hits 74.0/100. Effectiveness goes to Thorne at 80.0/100 against Optimum Nutrition's 77.0/100 but ingredient quality ties at 92.0/100 for each.

Pick Optimum Nutrition if you train for strength and want decent performance without spending silly money at £16.00. It suits competitive athletes who need Informed Choice certification and anyone happy to mix extra into shakes or food. Go for Thorne only if you face strict anti-doping rules and NSF certification gives you peace of mind despite the £42.99 price tag. Women after cognitive benefits alongside gym work might lean that way too. Budget buyers should avoid Thorne completely since its value score of 44.0/100 reflects the steep cost compared with equally clean options.

Both powders taste neutral and mix well without changing your drink much. They stay free from major allergens and suit vegan diets. Optimum Nutrition needs about one and a half scoops to match research doses so the tub lasts fewer days than you first expect. Thorne gives the exact 5g hit every time which feels simpler for daily use.

Optimum Nutrition Micronized Creatine Powder 317g Winner 79.0/100

Optimum Nutrition Micronized Creatine Powder is a no-frills creatine monohydrate supplement from one of the most trusted sports nutrition brands on the market.

Effectiveness
Optimum Nutritio..
77.0/100
Thorne Creatine 405g
80.0/100
Ingredient Quality
Optimum Nutritio..
92.0/100
Thorne Creatine 405g
92.0/100
Value for Money
Optimum Nutritio..
68.0/100
Thorne Creatine 405g
44.0/100
Side Effects
Optimum Nutritio..
91.0/100
Thorne Creatine 405g
87.0/100
Certifications
Optimum Nutritio..
86.0/100
Thorne Creatine 405g
97.0/100

What are the key differences?

Optimum Nutrition Micro.. is best for: Strength and resistance training athletes looking for performance and power output gains, Competitive or tested athletes who need Informed Choice-certified products
Thorne Creatine 405g is best for: Competitive and professional athletes subject to anti-doping testing, Consumers who prioritise third-party purity verification above cost

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better, Optimum Nutrition Micronized Creatine Powder 317g or Thorne Creatine 405g?
Optimum Nutrition Micronized Creatine Powder 317g scores 79.0/100 overall while Thorne Creatine 405g scores 74.0/100. Optimum Nutrition Micronized Creatine Powder 317g comes out ahead, scoring higher on effectiveness (77.0 vs 80.0). Optimum Nutrition Micronized C is best suited for Strength and resistance training athletes looking for performance and power output gains and Competitive or tested athletes who need Informed Choice-certified products. Thorne Creatine 405g is better for Competitive and professional athletes subject to anti-doping testing and Consumers who prioritise third-party purity verification above cost.
Is Optimum Nutrition Micronized Creatine Powder 317g worth the price compared to Thorne Creatine 405g?
Optimum Nutrition Micronized Creatine Powder 317g costs £16.00 while Thorne Creatine 405g is £42.99. For value, Optimum Nutrition Micronized Creatine Powder 317g scores 68.0/100 vs Thorne Creatine 405g's 44.0/100. Optimum Nutrition Micronized Creatine Powder 317g delivers better value relative to its quality.
Which has fewer side effects?
Optimum Nutrition Micronized Creatine Powder 317g scores 91.0/100 for side effects (higher means fewer reported issues) while Thorne Creatine 405g scores 87.0/100. Reviewers report fewer side effects with Optimum Nutrition Micronized Creatine Powder 317g. For certification and testing, Optimum Nutrition Mi scores 86.0/100 vs Thorne Creatine 405g's 97.0/100. Always consult a healthcare professional before starting any supplement.

Related Product Comparisons

What the Data Says

Why do 87% of UK creatine products lack third-party certification?

87% of UK creatine products have zero independent certification. Out of 31 creatine products we scored, just 4 carry third-party verification: Bulk Creapure (Creapure + Informed Sport), Optimum Nutrition (Informed Choice), Thorne (NSF Certified for Sport), and Ovrload Crealyte Gummies (Creapure + Informed Sport).

The quality gap is real. Certified creatine scores 77.2/100 on average. Uncertified creatine scores 67.5. That's a 9.7-point difference on overall quality, and the ingredient quality gap is even wider: 88.5 vs 70.9.

Why so few? Third-party testing costs money, and UK regulations don't require it for sports supplements. Brands that invest in certification tend to use higher-grade raw materials too. Bulk Creapure, our top-scoring creatine at 91/100, uses Creapure-branded monohydrate manufactured in Germany with documented purity testing. Most budget creatine powders don't disclose where their creatine comes from or whether it's been independently verified.

If purity matters to you, look for one of these four certifications on the label: Creapure, Informed Sport, Informed Choice, or NSF Certified for Sport.

Is creatine monohydrate better than HCL or other forms?

Monohydrate wins. The top 5 creatine products in our database are all monohydrate-based, led by Bulk Creapure at 91/100. That's not a coincidence.

Creatine monohydrate has decades of clinical research behind it. Over 500 published studies confirm its effects on muscle strength, power output, and recovery. HCL, ethyl ester, and buffered forms have far less evidence, and none have been shown to outperform monohydrate in head-to-head trials.

The 'better absorption' claim for HCL sounds compelling, but there's limited independent data to support it at the doses you'd actually take. Monohydrate is also the cheapest form by a wide margin.

The bloating concern with monohydrate is real for some people, but it's usually a loading-phase issue. Starting at 3-5g daily (no loading phase) avoids it for most users.

Disclaimer: AIScored provides data-driven comparisons based on publicly available reviews. This is not medical advice. Affiliate links may earn us a commission at no extra cost to you.

Feedback & Suggestions

Spotted an issue? Wrong price, incorrect data, or something else off? Let us know and we'll fix it.

Missing a product you'd like us to review? Tell us the product name and we'll consider adding it.