While decidedly not authentic Italian cuisine, chicken parmesan is nonetheless a very popular dish that has come to exemplify Italian-American comfort food. Much like lasagna, another red-sauce staple that often eschews authenticity in favor of indulgence, chicken parm comes in many forms and iterations, with each restaurant offering its own twist on the decadent tradition. In addition to chicken parm subs, you’ll find an array of Italian and Italian-inspired chains that tinker with various versions of marinara, herbs, techniques, and cheese to various degrees of success.
After my recent lasagna taste-test, I embarked on a chicken parm edition across southern New Hampshire and northern Massachusetts. And after consuming enough cheese-crusted chicken to last me a year, these were the results.
Here’s how the chicken parm compared across five popular Italian chains, ranked in descending order from my least favorite to the overall best.
The Ninety-Nine
Nutrition: (Per Serving)
Calories: 1,120
Fat: 25 g (Saturated Fat: 7 g)
Sodium: 1,970 mg
Carbs: 162 g (Fiber: 10 g, Sugar: 14 g)
Protein: 64 g
For better or worse, I grew up on the Ninety-Nine, a Northeast chain with locations in every New England state, as well as New York. The American brand with a quasi-Italian accent throws a lot at the board to see what sticks, from tempura-style cauliflower and mozzarella “moons” to fish tacos and ribs. Then there’s the chicken parmigiana, a panko-crusted crispy chicken breast topped with tomato sauce, melted mozzarella, and provolone, and served with penne pasta and “rustic” bread. For this dish, which cost me $17.29, I re-visited the location from my childhood in Hooksett, N.H. The results, though, were less than nostalgic.
The look: Literally none of my notes, regarding appearance, were good. The pasta looked cheap and basic, the sauce looked cheese-less and forgettable (and alarmingly akin to a bottled sauce off some generic shelf), and apparently when it comes to bread, “rustic” in this case means a “dry afterthought.” The chicken itself was the only part that looked even remotely palatable, but even that had issues: namely, it was way too thick for traditional chicken parm, looking more like a lazily home-cooked chicken breast that someone decided to slap some cheese on at the last minute. It smelled pretty good—buttery and garlicky—but not even aroma could salvage this insult to Italian cookery.
The taste: Flavor-wise, this chicken parm lived up to its deflating presentation. The pasta and the sauce tasted exactly like how I remember pasta tasting from my high school cafeteria—and that’s not a compliment. The bread was indeed as dry, bland, and forgettable as it appeared. And the chicken, although again being the best part of this dish, was still a thudding disappointment. It’s way too thick for chicken parm, and wound up tasting chewy and kinda gnarly, with not near enough cheese (or quality sauce) to help mask the textural challenges. At the end of the day, this tastes like something someone would make at home—and not well.
Uno Pizzeria & Grill
Nutrition: (Per Serving)
Calories: 1,260
Fat: 39 g (Saturated Fat: 7 g)
Sodium: 2,390 mg
Carbs: 125 g (Fiber: 7 g, Sugar: 15 g)
Protein: 82 g
Next up, I visited the New Hampshire state capital of Concord for my long-awaited return to Uno Pizzeria & Grill. Based on this visit, however, it’ll probably be even longer until I return again. The chain, known for its deep-dish, should probably stick to over-stuffing its pizza, considering how clunky and excessive its romano-crusted chicken parm was, hand-breaded with panko and romano, topped with mozzarella, and served atop marinara-tossed rigatoni. This dish cost me $17.99.
The look: My initial impression, which is not necessarily a bad thing, was that this looked like plump schnitzel. It didn’t seem like the most authentic or ideal presentation, per se, but it wasn’t horrendous either. Mostly, it was the sheer volume of the dish that came off as daunting and needlessly indulgent. That said, the huge portion of chicken looked crispy and golden-brown, the bubbling layers of melty cheese were enticing, and the pasta—which was evenly mixed with redolent marinara—seemed an immense improvement over the cafeteria-style pasta from the Ninety-Nine.
The taste: Uno can talk the talk, but evidently it can’t walk the walk. For as big and bold as it looked, it didn’t taste nearly as bright. In fact, the chicken—which was allegedly breaded in panko and cheese—was shockingly bland and one-note. There’s a nice crunch to the breading, but I couldn’t detect hardly any romano, and the mozzarella on top is overpowered by the immensity of the poultry. The pasta, which looked so promising, was just as bland. The whole thing was desperately in need of herbs, salt, and perhaps a defter hand when it comes to cheese. All in all, it was way too much of something I wanted almost none of.
Olive Garden
Nutrition: (Per Serving)
Calories: 1,020
Fat: 51 g (Saturated Fat: 14 g)
Sodium: 3,300 mg
Carbs: 80g (Fiber: 7 g, Sugar: 13 g)
Protein: 64 g
After a solid showing in my lasagna taste-test, I had high expectations for Olive Garden. Perhaps those expectations were a tad unreasonable, though, because the chicken parmigiana from this iconic Italian chain simply couldn’t hold a candle to the winners. While a notable improvement over the previous two entries on this list, this version—which I ordered at a location in Manchester, N.H., for $19.99—was a disappointing plate of lightly fried parmesan-breaded chicken breasts with spaghetti, marinara, and melted Italian cheeses.
The look: Again, my first thought here was how much this reminded me of cafeteria food. And again, that’s not a compliment. Granted, it looks fresher and crispier than other dishes from this taste-test, but it wasn’t enough to make it look appetizing or even remotely authentic. The spaghetti, too, comes off as a random aside with a dollop of standard-looking red sauce.
The taste: Fortunately, the taste fared quite a bit better than the ho-hum presentation. The texture is amazingly crispy, resembling a well-fried schnitzel, while the interior remains plump and succulent. Some of the edges were a little burnt, but not really in a bad way. My main critiques were that, after a while, some of that impressive texture gets soggy under the blanket of gooey cheese. And the spaghetti was just as random and forgettable as I assumed.
Bertucci’s Italian Restaurant
Nutrition: (Per Serving)
Calories: 1,230
Fat: 36 g (Saturated Fat: 15 g)
Sodium: 3.170 mg
Carbs: 140 g (Fiber: 14 g, Sugar: 19 g)
Protein: 88 g
Growing up in New England, I regarded Bertucci’s quite highly. I loved the convincingly faux design, reminiscent of a Tuscan villa, and the brick-oven pizza. For my first foray into Bertucci’s chicken parm, which set me back $24.99 in North Andover, Mass., I was cautiously optimistic. This version is made with Pecorino Romano, mozzarella, and pomodoro with a side of spaghetti.
The look: By far, this was the most unique-looking chicken parm of the bunch, as well as the straight-up best. This was the most schnitzel-looking dish of them all, in the very best ways, with its optimal thickness, crispy-looking texture, golden-brown sheen, and slight char around the edges. There’s a nice bubbling layer of melty cheese, evenly dispersed on top, and the pasta is a vast improvement over anything else on this list so far. The herbs looked a little sad and haphazard, but that’s mere pittance compared to the rest of this stunner.
The taste: Indeed, my first impression was that this was Italian chicken schnitzel. In a good way. I absolutely loved the crunchy edges, the vibrant sauce, and the well-balanced, well-melted cheeses. Texturally, the chicken itself was a little tough and rubbery towards the middle, but nothing that pitch-perfect sauce and cheese couldn’t cover up. The pasta, too, felt way more harmonious here than with the other renditions, and unlike the others, the whole dish seemed like it was prioritizing quality over quantity.
Carrabba’s Italian Grill
Nutrition: (Per Serving)
Calories: 760
Fat: 45 g (Saturated Fat: 16 g)
Sodium: 1,890 mg
Carbs: 19g (Fiber: 4 g, Sugar: 9 g)
Protein: 68 g
Evidently, I’m a newfound Carrabba’s stan. The winner of my previous lasagna taste-test, this Italian chain once again proved victorious here, proving once and for all that this chain is the end all-be all when it comes to decadent Italian-American comfort food. For Made with “Mama Mandola’s” breadcrumbs, sautéed and topped with pomodoro sauce, parmesan, romano, and mozzarella, this dish cost me $22.99 in Bedford, N.H.
The look: My immediate note says it all: “yum!” Everything about this looked amazing, from the even layers of ooey, gooey cheese, hot and fresh from the oven, to the herbaceous sauce, crispy edges on the perfectly plump chicken, and the fact that the staff thoughtfully split the order in half, since I was sharing a portion with my husband. (Notably, we did this at all of the restaurants, and Carrabba’s is the only one to split the portion for us.) Everything, too, looked refreshingly wholesome and balanced, once again opting for quality over quantity.
The taste: Honestly, this was pretty great. The chicken, which was just thick enough, boasted a pleasant crispy texture that held up well under the cheese and sauce—succulent and tender on the inside, while retaining a golden-brown crunch around the edges. There’s a great ratio of cheese-to-meat here, and the sauce lends a acidic zing that helps balance everything out. The pasta, rather than relegated to afterthought, was carefully prepared, perfectly sauced, and paired well with the rest of the dish.
For classic red-sauces dishes, it seems, Carrabba’s is hard to beat.
