Cuisinart CPC-600N1 Review
Pros: Good pressure cooking performance, relatively easy to clean
Cons: Interface is a bit clunky, fewer cooking presets than average
Compare to Similar Products
$114.49 at Amazon
$89.95 at Amazon
|$100 List||$60 List|
$69.99 at Amazon
$70.89 at Amazon
|Pros||Good pressure cooking performance, relatively easy to clean||Versatile, intuitive, feature-rich, great value||User friendly, easy to clean, reasonably priced, pressure release button||Perfect size for meals for one, easy to clean, good pressure cooking performance, doesn't need much counter space||Good overall cooking performance, easy to clean|
|Cons||Interface is a bit clunky, fewer cooking presets than average||Rice is a bit sticky, lid and stainless steel pot can be difficult to clean||Meat slightly less tender than some other models||Too small for family meals, meat just shy of perfectly tender||No lid storage|
|Bottom Line||A capable cooker that lacks any differentiating features and doesn't feature the best price||An easy-to-use, versatile model that won't break the bank and offers plenty of useful features||The best option for most kitchens, this model is easy to use and a breeze to clean||A fantastic smaller appliance for singles or for couples that aren't fans of leftovers||An easy to clean, great performing product, especially for the price you pay|
|Rating Categories||Cuisinart CPC-600N1||Instant Pot Duo Plu...||Instant Pot DUO Nova||Instant Pot DUO Mini||Presto 02141|
|User Friendliness (35%)|
|Cooking Performance (30%)|
|Ease Of Cleaning (25%)|
|Cooking Features (10%)|
|Specs||Cuisinart CPC-600N1||Instant Pot Duo Plu...||Instant Pot DUO Nova||Instant Pot DUO Mini||Presto 02141|
|Pot Material||Nonstick||Stainless Steel||Stainless Steel||Stainless Steel||Nonstick|
|Capacity||6 quart||6 quart||6 quart||3 quart||6 quart|
Our Analysis and Test Results
The Cuisinart keeps things fairly spartan when it comes to its interface. While this makes things simple, it also means a lot more button-pushing to get to your desired settings. For example, you'll have to press and hold the time button while the timer slowly scrolls up and then let go once you hit your desired time. You'll also have to press the menu button repeatedly to cycle through the cooking functions. Additionally, the LED screen that displays all this information is relatively small.
While these things certainly aren't dealbreakers, and you'll likely get used to the control panel's idiosyncrasies after just a few meals, it is a hurdle that you don't have to clear with most other models on the market.
Pressure cooking is an inherently consistent cooking method — as long as a cooker can achieve the proper pressure and temperature, the results are likely to be fairly consistent. As such, the Cuisinart performed very similarly to most of the other models we tested.
In our tests, the Cuisinart treated to fluffy rice, tender meat, and its saute function was able to handle everything from mushrooms to carrots. We found some models that could make meat taste just a bit more tender, but overall, the Cuisinart can likely pass anyone's personal taste test.
Ease of Cleaning
The Cuisinart keeps its design relatively simple and presents few cleaning challenges.
It utilizes a two-piece lid, which makes cleaning its gasket easier but does take longer to dry. The nonstick cooking pot stays clean even when you saute a bit too long, requiring just a quick scrub.
It's relatively light on cooking features, meaning you'll likely have to manually punch in settings for many meals.
A Full List of The Cuisinart CPC-600N1 6 Quart's Cooking Functions
Manual Pressure Cooking, Browning, Saute, Simmer
The Cuisinart lists for a fairly standard price. While we wouldn't call this a poor value, there are multiple other models on the market that cook just as well and are just as easy to clean, offer more features and are easier to use, and cost the same amount or even less. Therefore, we feel that there are plenty of better ways to spend your money if you're looking for a pressure cooker.
The Cuisinart performs well overall but fails to differentiate itself in a field of very similar products. This, in conjunction with some minor ease of use issues, makes it one of our least favorite models.
— Michelle Powell and Max Mutter