Reviews you can trust.
See why.The Best 8-Inch Nonstick Skillets
We spent 66 hours at the stove and cooked 700 eggs to find the best small nonstick skillet.
By Updated Sept. 1, 2022
Top Picks
What You Need To Know
“They're so cute!” said nearly everyone who walked by me while I was testing these little pans. And my coworkers were right: An 8-inch nonstick skillet does seem positively adorable next to a 10- or 12-inch version. But these petite pans are useful in their own right. They're perfect for making a couple of fried eggs or an omelet, for cooking recipes scaled down for one or two people, and for toasting nuts, spices, seeds, bread crumbs, garlic, and more.
To find the best 8-inch nonstick skillet, we studied the market and chose eight pans, priced from about $15.00 to $110.00, including one from OXO, the maker of our winning 12-inch nonstick skillet. Four of the pans were traditional nonstick, and the other four were ceramic nonstick, an alternative coating often marketed as “green” or “environmentally friendly.” All the pans were perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA)–free.
We tested the pans extensively, starting with a dry egg test in which we cooked eggs one after another, with no oil or butter, until they started to stick or until we hit 50 eggs. Next we made omelets, scalloped potatoes, and scrambled eggs in each pan, beating them up a bit along the way to simulate long-term use: We washed them repeatedly, subjected them to thermal shock (heating them and then plunging them into an ice bath), and banged them on a concrete ledge to test their construction. Finally, we repeated the dry egg challenge at the end of testing to see how the nonstick surfaces held up over time. So does it matter which little nonstick skillet you buy? If you care about not having flakes of nonstick coating in your food, it does.
Traditional versus Ceramic Nonstick Pans
Hands down the most important factor in determining a good pan was the kind of nonstick coating. There are two types used on cookware: traditional PTFE, or polytetrafluoroethylene (Teflon is the most well-known brand name), and ceramic, which has exploded in popularity in recent years as a result of concerns about the safety and environmental impact of PTFE.
We tested four pans in each style, and differences emerged immediately. In the first egg test, seven of the eight pans were able to cleanly release all 50 eggs; the one that couldn't was ceramic. A few days later, the coating started flaking off two of the pans—both ceramic. And at the end of testing, the fourth (and final) ceramic model was the most scratched-up of any pan we tested, which doesn't bode well for durability. Meanwhile, the PTFE pans emerged reasonably unscathed. Clearly the ceramic pans weren't as durable. We delved into the science behind the two kinds of nonstick coating to understand why.
“Ceramic” is a broad term that e...
Everything We Tested
Highly Recommended
- Capacity: 3 stars out of 3.
- Durability: 3 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 3 stars out of 3.
- Nonstick Ability: 3 stars out of 3.
This little OXO skillet bested the rest for three simple reasons: superior nonstick ability, a comfortable handle, and a nicely shaped body. It cruised through 50 eggs at the beginning and end of testing, indicating a slick, durable nonstick coating. Testers found its rounded, brushed-steel handle “grippy” and liked that it gave “options for where to hold.” Construction-wise, it was “lightweight but sturdy” and perfectly balanced, making it especially pleasing to cook with.
Recommended
- Capacity: 3 stars out of 3.
- Durability: 3 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 2.5 stars out of 3.
- Nonstick Ability: 3 stars out of 3.
This pricey pan had a great nonstick surface; it released 50 eggs easily at both the beginning and the end of testing. It was also notably well constructed and durable. Yet, while testers called the pan nicely “balanced,” a few took issue with the handle, which felt “stable” but “uncomfortable,” thanks to a concave metal shape with hard edges that dug into some testers' hands.
- Capacity: 3 stars out of 3.
- Durability: 3 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 2.5 stars out of 3.
- Nonstick Ability: 3 stars out of 3.
This expensive pan performed well: The nonstick coating released eggs just as cleanly at the end of testing as it did at the beginning. The handle was longer and heavier, which made some testers feel that the balance was a bit out of whack; “it's a little clunky,” said one tester, who explained, “I feel like I'm a mile from the pan.” But overall, it felt “well constructed” and durable.
- Capacity: 2 stars out of 3.
- Durability: 3 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 2.5 stars out of 3.
- Nonstick Ability: 3 stars out of 3.
This pan released eggs perfectly and stayed notably scratch-free, likely due to its five layers of nonstick coating (the rest of the PTFE pans we tested had three). The handle was “comfortable and grippy,” and the rivets were coated in nonstick, which made them particularly easy to clean. The pan's rim was uncoated and got stained, but our major gripe was capacity: Unless we were cooking just one or two eggs, it was too small. “I'm afraid I'm going to lose some,” said one tester midscramble, and scalloped potatoes overflowed in the oven.
Recommended with reservations
- Capacity: 3 stars out of 3.
- Durability: 1.5 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 2.5 stars out of 3.
- Nonstick Ability: 3 stars out of 3.
The only ceramic model to stay nonstick throughout testing, this little pan was divisive. We liked that there weren't any rivets on the inside, which allowed us to swoop around with a spatula and made it easier to clean. But the handle was shorter and was set low on the pan, which put it closer to the heat; most testers wanted a cooler handle and more clearance underneath so they could grab it more easily. This pan also sustained the most scratches, and its handle wiggled a bit by the end of testing.
Not Recommended
- Capacity: 3 stars out of 3.
- Durability: 3 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 2 stars out of 3.
- Nonstick Ability: 1 stars out of 3.
It was easier to see browning in this light-colored ceramic pan, but it was the only one to fail our first dry egg test, starting to stick after 40 eggs. The second time we ran the dry egg test, the pan couldn't release a single one. That said, this pan has a nice shape, good balance, and a comfortable (if slightly thin) handle. It was often hard to clean, clinging onto bits of egg.
- Capacity: 3 stars out of 3.
- Durability: 1 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 2 stars out of 3.
- Nonstick Ability: 2 stars out of 3.
This pan was able to release 50 eggs during the first test but just 30 in the final egg test. Because it wasn't as resistant to thermal shock, the ceramic coating started to flake off during testing. The pan itself had a nice flared shape, but the handle was very sharp at the end, right where we wanted to grip to flip the pan's contents or shimmy things around. It was also notably hard to clean, clinging to eggs even after several rounds of scrubbing.
- Capacity: 3 stars out of 3.
- Durability: 1 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 2 stars out of 3.
- Nonstick Ability: 1.5 stars out of 3.
Despite this pan's name, we found that it does not actually contain copper, a metal often used in high-end cookware because it is highly responsive to heat. (We checked by cutting the pan in half and using a chemical test strip that can detect copper.) The pan was very lightweight—testers said it felt “cheap,” and it dented readily in our abuse test. It released 50 eggs at the beginning of testing, but after we thermal-shocked it, the coating along the rim started to chip. It also couldn't release a single egg cleanly in the final dry egg test. A finger divot located too far toward the bottom of its handle got really hot, and the other end tapered to a sharp point that cut into our hands.
Reviews you can trust
Reviews you can trust
The mission of America’s Test Kitchen Reviews is to find the best equipment and ingredients for the home cook through rigorous, hands-on testing. We stand behind our winners so much that we even put our seal of approval on them.
Hannah Crowley
Hannah is an executive editor for ATK Reviews and cohost of Gear Heads on YouTube.
0 Comments
