Keep This, Not That: A Kitchen Appliance Showdown

Ina Garten’s cookbook How Easy Is That? has a section calling out the kitchen appliances and home goods that make her life easier: sturdy measuring cups, a large stockpot, and… two dishwashers. I love Ina, but girl, we live in a society. For most of us, kitchen space comes at a premium. And that is even more apparent when you’re combining two kitchens’ worth of stuff.

If you’re young, moving in with a partner might mean you’re each bringing the three spoons you got off your local Buy Nothing group. But it’s more likely you’ve amassed an amount of stuff you don’t have room for, and now you have to make some hard decisions. Maybe one of you is a microwave gal, while the other is fiercely dedicated to her air fryer. Or you only have room for a blender or a food processor, and can’t tell which is more versatile. And really, is a stand mixer all that if there’s already a hand mixer in the relationship?

To answer these conundrums — and keep you from breaking up as soon as you’ve signed a lease — we decided to consult the professionals. Meet our judges: Tanya Bush, pastry chef at Little Egg and co-founder of Cake Zine; Khushbu Shah, author of Amrikan; James Park, author of Chili Crisp; Jon Kung, author of Kung Food; Clarice Lam, author of the forthcoming Breaking Bao; Elle Simone Scott, author of the forthcoming Food Gifts; Tyler Malek, co-founder of ice cream shop Salt & Straw; Sarah Fennel of Broma Bakery; and Jessie Sheehan, author of Snackable Bakes. In five head-to-head matchups, we asked them to determine which common kitchen appliance they’d choose if they only had room for one, and why that tool reigns supreme.

Air fryer vs. microwave

We started with the “old and busted vs. new hotness” debate. The microwave is known as a way to turn that morning’s coffee into some sort of gray mystery substance that tastes almost like coffee but not (though there is a growing contingent of microwave enthusiasts, with cookbooks to match). The air fryer, on the other hand, is the latest appliance that will supposedly solve all your problems. Both can easily be used to reheat food, but which is ultimately more versatile?

While Park says “you can’t get crispy, crunchy texture from cooking in the microwave,” our judges overwhelmingly preferred the microwave over an air fryer, using it for heating up leftovers, warming milk for toddlers, and making popcorn. Shah and Lam both appreciate how a microwave can be used to temper chocolate. And Fennel notes that your oven may have a convection setting, meaning “you have a built-in air fryer already in your kitchen.” But even if your oven doesn’t allow for that, the microwave is the appliance most judges agree you’ll get the most use out of.

Winner: Microwave

Slow cooker vs. Instant Pot

It’s quite possible you grew up with a slow cooker, aka a crockpot. The appliance was developed in the 1940s as a way to cook hearty meals without having to turn on the oven. It became more popular in the 1970s, rebranded toward working women who didn’t have time to cook dinner all day. The Instant Pot made a similar promise when it hit the market in 2010; the multicooker’s combination of a slow cooker and pressure cooker became all the rage for making everything from curry to yogurt. Each appliance has one group of ardent adherents and another group who keep it on the top shelf collecting dust.

You can easily get away with not having either of these appliances. Bush, for example, says she’d rather reserve her limited kitchen space for other things. But if set-it-and-forget-it meals are your jam, most of our judges go with the multifunctional Instant Pot, using it to cook rice, saute vegetables, and pressure cook, especially if you’re doing a lot of South Asian cooking. “Instant Pots make such quick work of faves like spaghetti bolognese, pulled pork, and chili, that having one seems like a very good idea all around,” says Sheehan. And as Kung sums it up: “Instant Pots can be crockpots, but crockpots can’t be Instant Pots.”

Winner: Instant Pot

Food processor vs. blender

This was by far the most contentious appliance showdown of the bunch, with an even split between judges who said you need one or the other, and some judges insisting you need both.

Scott says a food processor is “able to handle big jobs like shredding, slicing, dough-making and so much more” better than blenders, especially when compared to today’s more common bullet blenders. And Sheehan says a food processor is more versatile: “You can make hummus and finely chop veggies, and even puree soups or sauces.”

But Team Blender says the blender can do everything a food processor can, not the other way around. According to Bush, a good blender is just as useful as a food processor, and it takes up less room without clunky attachments that risk slicing up your hand when you get them out of the cabinet. And Kung notes that he can do anything a food processor does by hand, just much more slowly. “I can’t puree anything as smoothly as a good blender,” he says.

Shah, Fennel, and Malek were all torn, with Shah saying that if you love to cook “you genuinely need both.” And Malek says for the few jobs a food processor can’t do, a stick blender works just as well and takes up less space than a full-size blender. His caveat that a regular blender or a stick blender are similarly useful, while offering no substitute for a food processor, is enough to push the ruling over.

Winner: Food processor

Toaster vs. toaster oven

Sheehan admits a regular toaster would probably take up less room than a toaster oven, and Fennel says toaster ovens are redundant, as they’re “basically tiny regular ovens that just take up more space on your counter.” But the judges were nearly unanimous in choosing the toaster oven. Park gives it points for versatility, saying a toaster can only really make toast. And while you can roast vegetables and broil cheese on sandwiches in a full-size oven, the toaster oven can be so much easier if you’re cooking for one or two. “Sometimes you just want to bake a single cookie and don’t want to power up the entire oven,” says Bush.

Winner: Toaster oven

Stand mixer vs. hand mixer

There is perhaps no greater emblem of stable home life than a stand mixer on the counter. It’s a status item as much as an appliance, and because of that, it has received some backlash. Claire Saffitz developed her entire cookbook Dessert Person around not needing a stand mixer, and as Alyse Whitney writes for Bon Appétit, a hand mixer “performs the basic tasks of a fancy stand mixer for less than ¼ of the price!”

Shah agrees with Whitney, noting the stand mixer’s expense and footprint. “It’s only really worth it if you are a big baker,” she says. But the rest of our judges say the ease of a stand mixer makes it the winner. The word “workhorse” came up multiple times, and Lam and Sheehan point out you can’t knead dough with a hand mixer. Bush and Park also praise the ability to turn away from the stand mixer while it’s mixing, rather than stand at your counter holding a hand mixer until your bicep screams. And though stand mixers may be expensive, Fennel says a good one “will last you decades.” Who knows, by then you might be in a bigger home.

Winner: Stand mixer

Additional photo illustration credits: stand mixer by iStock;, referee and hand mixer by Shutterstock

Andrea D’Aquino is an illustrator and author based in New York City.