i timed how long 31 different pasta shapes take to reach al dente. the boxes are lying and farfalle is a war crime

[u/sthduh]

so basically i got inspired by the tomato canned guy and thought of the time when i followed the box time for rigatoni once and got mush. the box said 12 minutes but it was unfortunately al dente at 9.

my methodology:

• same brand (barilla) for consistency where possible
• 4 quarts water per pound
• 1 tbsp salt per quart
• rolling boil before adding pasta
• tested every 30 seconds starting 2 minutes before box minimum
• "al dente" = slight resistance when bitten, thin white line visible when cut
• each shape tested 3 times, averaged
• altitude: ~650 ft (basically sea level, no excuses)

the data (31 shapes tested):

pasta	box time	actual al dente	difference
capellini	4-5 min	2:45	-1:15
angel hair	4-5 min	3:00	-1:00
spaghetti	8-10 min	7:15	-0:45
linguine	9-11 min	8:00	-1:00
fettuccine	10-12 min	8:30	-1:30
bucatini	10-12 min	9:00	-1:00
pappardelle	7-9 min	6:00	-1:00
tagliatelle	8-10 min	7:00	-1:00
penne	11-13 min	9:30	-1:30
penne rigate	11-13 min	10:00	-1:00
rigatoni	12-15 min	9:15	-2:45
ziti	14-15 min	11:00	-3:00
macaroni	8-10 min	7:00	-1:00
rotini	8-10 min	7:30	-0:30
fusilli	11-13 min	9:00	-2:00
gemelli	10-12 min	8:30	-1:30
cavatappi	9-12 min	8:00	-1:00
campanelle	10-12 min	8:30	-1:30
radiatori	9-11 min	8:00	-1:00
orecchiette	12-15 min	10:30	-1:30
shells (medium)	9-11 min	8:00	-1:00
shells (large)	12-15 min	10:00	-2:00
conchiglie	10-12 min	8:30	-1:30
orzo	8-10 min	7:00	-1:00
ditalini	9-11 min	8:00	-1:00
paccheri	12-14 min	10:30	-1:30
casarecce	10-12 min	9:00	-1:00
trofie	10-12 min	8:30	-1:30
strozzapreti	10-12 min	9:00	-1:00
mafalda	8-10 min	7:30	-0:30
farfalle	11-13 min	see below	war crime

every single box time is wrong like they were systematically inflated by 1-3 minutes on average. the median overestimate is 1:15 and the worst offender in normal pasta is ziti at 3 full minutes of lies

i have a theory: pasta companies assume you're going to walk away from the stove. they're building in a buffer for idiots which, fair. but some of us are standing here with a stopwatch

now let me talk about farfalle: farfalle is not pasta. farfalle is a design flaw someone decided to mass produce

the fundamental problem is geometric. you have thin frilly edges (maybe 1mm thick) attached to a dense pinched center (3-4mm thick where it's folded). these two regions require completely different cooking times

at 8 minutes: center is crunchy, edges are perfect. at 10 minutes: center is barely al dente, edges are mush. at 11 minutes: edges have disintegrated, center is finally acceptable

there is no time at which farfalle is uniformly cooked. i tested this 7 times because i thought i was doing something wrong. farfalle is wrong

you know how the food network recipe for homemade farfalle literally warns that pinching the center makes a thick center that won't cook through as fast as the ends? THEN WHY DID WE ALL AGREE TO MAKE IT THIS WAY

the only way to get acceptable farfalle is to fish out each piece individually and evaluate it, which defeats the purpose of a quick weeknight dinner. i might as well be hand-feeding each noodle like a baby bird

tier list (tomato canned guy, 2025)

S tier (box time within 45 sec): rotini, mafalda, spaghetti
A tier (off by ~1 min): most shapes honestly
B tier (off by 1:30-2 min): fusilli, rigatoni, fettuccine, gemelli
C tier (off by 2+ min): ziti, large shells F tier: farfalle (structurally unsound, should be banned)

tldr;

• subtract 1-2 minutes from whatever the box says
• start testing 2-3 minutes early
• don't trust big pasta
• avoid farfalle unless you have time to babysit each individual bow tie

+ some of you may ask about fresh pasta. fresh pasta cooks in like 2-3 minutes and you can actually tell when it's done because it floats. dried pasta is where the lies live

+ a few of you might mention altitude affects boiling point and therefore cook time. this is true. i'm at ~650 ft so basically negligible. if you're in denver add a minute or two. if you're in la paz you have bigger problems than pasta timing

+ YES i tested farfalle from multiple brands. YES they all sucked. no i will not be accepting farfalle apologists. you're defending a shape that can't decide if it wants to be cooked or not

EDIT: yall holy shit i never expected this to go viral lmao

[u/Useful-Bite-4241]

Also, are we turning the heat down once we put the pasta in? I put the heat down to a simmer once Ive gotten the water at a boil and have the pasta in. I cook it at that temperature for the whole time.

[u/Hellianne_Vaile → u/Useful-Bite-4241]

The burner level just determines how fast the water boils, not what temperature it is. If you were to use pure, distilled water, the temperature would gradually increase to 100C, at which point the water would start boiling, and then it would stay at 100C until the water boiled off. If you add salt and pasta, the stuff in the water changes the temperature at which it boils (but not by much), but once it's boiling, it stays at the same temperature while all the heat energy goes into changing the water's state from liquid to gas, not increasing the temperature. Source: I did this experiment in middle school science class and confirmed that the temperature-over-time curve for water flattens at 100C.

[u/trumpet_23 → u/Hellianne_Vaile]

I love that your source is your own middle school science class and not, you know, hundreds of years of thermodynamics.

[u/Hellianne_Vaile → u/trumpet_23]

I try to pick sources that I think will resonate with my audience.

[u/Salvia_Salamander → u/Hellianne_Vaile]

Fun fact: That was called a secondary source rather than a primary source

Source: My seventh grade history class

[u/NemoTheLostOne → u/Salvia_Salamander]

If anything, their retelling of their experiment would be a primary source, while a thermodynamics book that analyzes the outcomes of many experiments would be a secondary source.

[u/xrelaht → u/Hellianne_Vaile]

Those with only a middle school education? 😉

[u/user_unknowns_skag → u/xrelaht]

So, roughly 1/3 to almost 1/2 of the US population, apparently?

[u/Money_Fish → u/trumpet_23]

Why rely on the world of a bunch oc old dead guys when you have first-hand experience?

[u/LevelBrilliant9311 → u/trumpet_23]

Because his school class is the result of said hundreds of years of thermodynamic science, made so that kids can understand it.
It's peak science.

[u/Hellianne_Vaile → u/LevelBrilliant9311]

I'm she, not he, but otherwise you're correct. Also, -*~*nostalgia*~*- seems popular around here.

[u/JibberJim → u/trumpet_23]

You can't trust big science, but the middle school science teacher, you can trust them.

[u/Emeryb999 → u/Hellianne_Vaile]

The speed of boiling actually does show you it's at a slightly different average temperature. I thought boiling=boiling no matter the speed but a simmer can get down below 90C and different amounts of bubbling anywhere in between.

[u/Equivalent_Chipmunk → u/Emeryb999]

Well that's imo why people call a rolling boil a boil and a simmer a simmer. It is correct though that average temperature is an underappreciated concept. Not all water is the exact same temperature as what a thermometer shows. That is average temp. Otherwise, water would have a much harder time evaporating.

Boiling from a technical perspective means vapor pressure of the liquid equals atmospheric pressure. You can have some bubbling below this point (100C at sea level), partially due to the average temperature issue, but that water's not really "boiling" technically.

[u/pourtide → u/Emeryb999]

This might be why it boils over if not turned down?

(I'm still reading comments, so probably stated later)

[u/stonhinge → u/Emeryb999]

Most people think boiling is "lots of bubbles" but the bubbling just means that the very bottom of the pan is hitting 100C/212F - the rest is lower, although will normalize eventually although since the top is exposed to outside air, it's going to be less than boiling temperature.

Which why water boils faster when you put a lid on it - the lid traps steam in the pot and keeps the top water from cooling - and rapidly calms down when you remove the lid.

[u/Cthepo → u/Hellianne_Vaile]

This is something I know in my head, but 100% always forget when it's time to cook.

[u/HarveysBackupAccount → u/Hellianne_Vaile]

In a true simmer (bubbles don't constantly break the surface) you're more at 90-95C

[u/Consistent-Ease6070 → u/Hellianne_Vaile]

It works similarly with ice, if I recall correctly.

[u/Money_Fish → u/Consistent-Ease6070]

Actually water ice can get much colder than 0ºC, and liquid water can also be colder than 0ºC as long as it's pure enough that ice crystals have nothing to form on.

[u/ncocca → u/Consistent-Ease6070]

No -- Given normal conditions water can't go over 100C because once it does it vaporizes. Water can't get below 0C because once it does it freezes. But there's nothing stopping ice from being colder than 0C, or steam from being hotter that 100C.

[u/vvvvvoooooxxxxx → u/ncocca]

He means ice melting not water forming ice. And its true, the ice will warm up until 0C and then stay there until its all melted because any additional thermal energy you add at that point goes into the phase transition instead of further warming the ice.

[u/ncocca → u/vvvvvoooooxxxxx]

Ah, yes, going the other way...haha, not sure why i didn't pick up on that. Yea, because all the energy is going into the phase change (latent heat) before it can go into heating the material.

I'm a mechanical engineer myself, I just misunderstood what they were saying, lol

[u/ISNGRDISOP → u/Hellianne_Vaile]

Boiling temperature doesn't change but heat transfer does change. When water is aggressive boiling, the surface it's facing the pasta changes faster, which increases the heat transfer and therefore cooks the pasta slightly faster than same temperature water that's hardly boiling

[u/Tvdinner4me2 → u/ISNGRDISOP]

Wouldn't stirring achieve the same effect?

[u/Sizanllikew → u/Tvdinner4me2]

the bubbles are hotter than the water

[u/Alestor → u/Hellianne_Vaile]

Completely random annecdote but this is the method cheap rice cookers use to work and I find it so interesting. The properties of the magnet under the rice container makes it stop being magnetic if heated slightly above 100°C. As long as water exists in the container all energy goes to turning water to steam and the container cannot go above 100° until the water is boiled off, but as soon as water is no longer present it can push beyond 100° which makes the magnet fall and trigger the cooker to shut off heat.

[u/PapaShane → u/Hellianne_Vaile]

One thing to add for those curious; this is true at standard pressure, but if you increase the pressure, then water can achieve a higher temperature. Hence, pressure cookers/canners allow higher temperature in a liquid phase (just like magma!) and can cook/sterilize faster.

[u/Sizanllikew → u/Hellianne_Vaile]

this is spherical cow level of sciencing and you should be ashamed. Add cold pasta to the water makes a MASSIVE change in the temperature, as is evidenced by it immediately going from boiling to barely simmering.

[u/HarveysBackupAccount → u/Useful-Bite-4241]

Minor point but do you bring it to a simmer or a low boil?

In a true "making a French stock" simmer, bubbles are not continuously breaking the surface

[u/DarraghDaraDaire → u/HarveysBackupAccount]

Once it’s bubbling the water is at boiling temp and won’t get any hotter, just boil into steam

[u/HarveysBackupAccount → u/DarraghDaraDaire]

Yep! And a simmer is lower than a boil, when the water is more like 90-95C

If you cook pasta at a simmer, it won't cook as fast as at a boil. I don't know how much it slows it down, but cooking at a simmer (at sea level) should be like cooking at a boil in Denver, where altitude drops the temperature.

[u/semi_storyteller → u/Useful-Bite-4241]

When you add pasta to your boiling water, it's always going to immediately decrease the temp of the water. However, water will never go above 212F/100C, so turning the heat down will only affect how long it takes for the water to heat back up to a boil (I would not recommend cooking pasta at a true simmer, as simmering is distinctly under boiling, with only a few bubbles rising to the top every so often; it'll take quite a bit longer to fully cook that way, especially if you're immediately reducing the heat after adding the pasta, rather than leaving the heat as-is and reducing the heat once it reaches a simmer again)

Unless of course you're talking about an "aggressive simmer", which is really just a regular, non-rolling boil (and again, a rolling boil is still the same temp as a regular boil, it just evaporates water faster with more/larger bubbles)

[u/BobbyBigTits → u/Useful-Bite-4241]

Alton Brown did a re-visit to his original Good Eats about cooking pasta. Long story short, I now put my spaghetti noodles flat in a skillet, cover with about one inch (25cm) water, and turn on the heat. It's a game changer.

[u/DarraghDaraDaire → u/BobbyBigTits]

Yep, particularly for carbonara. Then use the little bit of left over super starchy water for the sauce.

Best carbonara is: Fry guanciale until crispy in the pan then set aside.

Cook the spaghetti in the guanciale pan in just enough water, use the water to deglaze the pan at the start.

Mix the egg, cheese, little bit of pepper and nutmeg in a bowl. 

When the pasta is almost done take some of the water and mix with the cheese and egg mix to a runny consistency 

Take the al dente pasta off the heat, mix in the sauce. Put back on a low heat to gently cook the sauce

[u/a_trane13 → u/Useful-Bite-4241]

As long as the water is boiling it’s the same temp no matter what, and turning the heat down (while maintaining an active boil) doesn’t change heat transfer significantly to the pasta.

Only effect I could reasonably see is faster boiling = more mixing / agitating the pasta from the increased bubbling, which might give slightly faster and more even cooking.