logo
I tried the new Ninja Creami Swirl that users are calling 'a dessert game changer' - Here's my honest review

I tried the new Ninja Creami Swirl that users are calling 'a dessert game changer' - Here's my honest review

Daily Mail​22-05-2025

Imagine a world where ice cream was at the tips of your fingers 24/7... Well, you don't have to because thanks to Ninja the dream has become reality.
The viral Ninja Creami ice cream maker has been a hot ticket item since its launch in July of 2021, with millions of shoppers flocking to try it. But, if you thought the delectable Creami machine was good, wait till you try its new partner in crime— the Ninja Swirl.
Ninja® CREAMi® Swirl 13-in-1 Soft Serve Ice Cream Machine
Serve up a good time with the kitchen appliance that is changing dessert forever.
Back in July 2021 the original Ninja Creami was launched but fans have a whole new way to enjoy this summer with the Ninja Creami Swirl!
This innovative device makes delectable pints of scoopable ice cream, sorbet, Fro-Yo, and more instantly — and even soft serve.
$350 Shop
Launched in February 2025, the new Ninja Creami Swirl is an ice cream innovation like no other. Taking after its big sis, the Ninja Creami, this device makes perfectly smooth ice cream at the touch of a button but with a twist (literally!).
I decided to take the wildly hyped kitchen appliance for a test drive myself to see if it lived up to not only its proceeding fame but the proven track record of its original iteration.
As a self-proclaimed ice cream connoisseur, I of course tested the Ninja Creami in 2021. Although it certainly did make delicious ice cream, I can't say I was blown away. However, I went in with high hopes for the new and noticeably larger Swirl.
HOW I TESTED
I started my Ninja Creami Swirl test the same way I would normally use the Creami, by creating a vanilla ice cream base in one of the Ninja Pints to freeze overnight. Both version of the machine come with an included recipe book for ease which I truly appreciated.
View this post on Instagram
A post shared by Shopping Finder US (@shoppingfinderus)
The only major difference I noticed during this stage was unlike the other machine's pints, these had a notable protruding nozzle for connecting to the soft serve port later on (but it caused no change in prep time!).
There is a reason the Ninja Creami Swirl is blowing up on social media, and it's due to its 13 different modes. You can make ice cream, gelato, milkshakes, and now even soft serve. The original iteration of the machine in its deluxe form only has 11 modes leaving out soft serve, custard, etc.
I prepped by vanilla ice cream on the 'soft serve' mode which roughly takes four minutes of mix time (nearly identical to the timing of the original Creami). To get the full effect I decided to also do a mix-in of Lucky Charms!
What I found exciting was this feature still functioned the same way for soft serve dispensing as it had in the pint version from the original Creami. My mix came out seriously seamless in just one minute too!
Of course, the real test came at the dispensing time. The Ninja Swirl is known for one major thing and it's the handle dispenser. Surprisingly, despite my worries, setting up the soft serve function was easy as pie. All I had to do was take my blended pint, snap it into the port on the front of the machine, pull the lever to dispense — and enjoy! (No, seriously, it was that simple!).
At first bite I definitely noticed there was a more 'melty' consistency, unlike the typical thicker blend of the Ninja Creami modes. I enjoyed the fact that the soft serve feature truly MADE soft serve right down to the texture — it made the legitimacy of the overall machine more solid for me.
PROS
Growing up in Vermont, my summer traditions consisted of visiting 'Cremee' stands (aka soft-serve but better!), and thanks to the Ninja Creami Swirl, I now have a way to bring home to me even in New York City. Users online said it was, 'a dessert game changer,' and now I seriously see why.
The pros were clear to me from the first use: experience, flavor, and clean-up.
As someone who deeply enjoys a sweet treat after dinner I found the Ninja Swirl exciting, fun, and downright delicious! The process is an activity in itself and the clean-up is near to none (at least for a single adult whom lives alone).
CONS
All in all I do not have any major complaints against the Ninja Swirl other than cost. There is no denying that at $350, this device is not cheap.
The cons? Price and size. The Ninja Swirl is significantly larger than the Ninja Creami and heavier, making it a device that is much less moveable. If you struggle with counter space this device is NOT for you (let's just say I had to say goodbye to some beloved mugs to make this work!).
Furthermore, the price as it stands now for some may not be that worth it. The only thing the original lacks is a soft serve dispenser and the modes that come with it otherwise the two are identical.
IS IT WORTH IT?
At first, I was intimidated by just how many modes there were on the Ninja Swirl, but after a few uses, it became second nature. By far, the stand-out feature of the Ninja Swirl is its interactive soft-serve dispenser. Powered by a handle on the right side of the machine, I was able to serve myself my ice cream directly onto a waffle cone!After trying out both the
After testing the machine against its original iteration, I can confess the Swirl is worth the hype for one reason — nostalgia! I can picture my younger brothers having a blast with it all summer long and have a feeling even my partner and I will have fun using the playful dessert creator.
However, if soft serve is not your jam the original Ninja Creami more than suffices. The key difference between the two models is the interactive soft serve dispenser which for me made the extra money worth it. But for those looking to just whip up delicious ice cream in any form efficiently the much cheaper Ninja Creami is our recommendation.
This viral countertop 'dessert game-changer' is easily the best kitchen product we have tried in 2025 thus far. We can guarantee that you won't have mixed feelings about ordering the Ninja Swirl by Creami because well — we didn't! Shop it now ahead of summer on Ninja's website, Amazon, or Best Buy.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

23andMe back on the auction block after former CEO makes 11th-hour bid
23andMe back on the auction block after former CEO makes 11th-hour bid

The Guardian

time15 minutes ago

  • The Guardian

23andMe back on the auction block after former CEO makes 11th-hour bid

DNA testing company 23andMe is back up for sale, throwing a purchase agreement reached last month into chaos, court filings show. The board of directors of 23andMe, which filed for bankruptcy in March, had agreed to sell the company and its assets to pharmaceutical firm Regeneron for $256m after conducting an auction in April. However, the founder and former CEO of the genetics company, Anne Wojcicki, put in a $305m bid through a newly formed non-profit, TTAM Research Institute, after the auction ended and pushed the bankruptcy court to re-open the sale process. She tried to buy the company multiple times during its long decline and bankruptcy but was rejected by the board. TTAM's offer of $305m will serve as a starting price for the secondary sale process, and Regeneron will be permitted to submit a competing bid that is at least $10m more. Both companies will be able to then submit a final offer. Whoever loses will qualify for a $10m breakup fee, according to the Wall Street Journal, which first reported the news. Sign up to TechScape A weekly dive in to how technology is shaping our lives after newsletter promotion The reopening of the auction puts the valuable trove of DNA data that 23andMe has accrued back on the market. Consumer concerns over who will control their data after a sale and what they would do with it prompted hundreds of 23andMe customers to delete their DNA info from the site. As part of its acquisition, Regeneron said it would comply with 23andMe's privacy policies and applicable laws with respect to the use of customer data. In the weeks since the acquisition was agreed upon, Regeneron said that it had already started to work with a consumer privacy ombudsman and was 'preparing to work with regulators, among others, to assure all interested stakeholders that 23andMe will be in safe hands and will not face the data breach issues that plagued it in the past', according to court filings. Regeneron agreed to the terms of the secondary sale but in court filings lamented that TTAM was permitted to submit the bid after the auction closed in spite of rules that prohibited such late bids. The company accused both TTAM and 23andMe of violating the court-ordered bidding procedures, including the deadline for bids and overbids. 'Since the auction ended, Regeneron has been subject to remarkably unfair treatment,' court filings read. 'Despite auction rules that unambiguously prohibit bids after the auction, and that likewise prohibit bidders from seeking to reopen the auction, TTAM—a vehicle controlled by the Debtors' former CEO, which participated at every stage of the auction—has submitted a flurry of new bids and has pressed non-stop to reopen the auction.' Regeneron further pointed to an eighth circuit ruling that warned against allowing buyers to 'bide[] its time during the auction, taking an opportunity to survey the landscape of the sale, only later to submit an upset bid at the lowest possible price'. The company also cited Wojcicki's previous failed attempts to purchase the company or take it private. 'In short, and given that history, no bidder would ever voluntarily participate in an auction in which the Wojcicki Parties, who led the company into this proceeding, could use the auction process as a vehicle for price discovery, with a one-way option to reopen the process—and to bid again—after the auction concludes,' Regeneron's attorneys wrote in court filings. 23andMe, Regeneron and TTAM did not respond to requests for comment.

Tesla stock plunges as Musk's feud with Trump over GOP tax bill spooks investors
Tesla stock plunges as Musk's feud with Trump over GOP tax bill spooks investors

The Independent

time41 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Tesla stock plunges as Musk's feud with Trump over GOP tax bill spooks investors

Shares of Elon Musk's electric vehicle maker are falling sharply Thursday as investors fear his dispute with President Donald Trump could end up hurting the company. Tesla plunged more than 10% in the afternoon as a disagreement over the U.S. president's budget bill turned nasty. After Musk said that Trump wouldn't haven't gotten elected without his help, Trump implied that he may turn the federal government against his company. 'The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts,' Trump wrote on his social messaging service Truth Social. 'I was always surprised that Biden didn't do it!' The drop on Thursday wiped out more than $100 billion from Tesla's market value, partially reversing a big runup in the eight weeks since Musk confirmed that Tesla would testing an autonomous, driverless 'robotaxi' service in Austin, Texas, this month. Investors fear Trump might not be in such a rush to usher in a future of self-driving cars in the U.S., and that could slam Tesla because so much of its future business depends on that. 'There is a fear that Trump is not going to play Mr. Nice Guy when in come to autonomous,' said Wedbush Securities analyst Dan Ives. 'The whole goal of robotaxis is to have them 20 or 25 cities next year. If you start to heighten the regulatory environment, that could delay that path.' Tesla shares doubled in the weeks after Trump was elected, hitting an all-time high on Dec. 17. They gave back those gains and more during Musk's time as head of a government cost-cutting group. In April, Musk vowed to focus much more on Tesla and its upcoming launch of driverless taxis, pushing up the value of the company on the market by more than $400 billion.

Google fends off part of textbook publisher lawsuit over ads
Google fends off part of textbook publisher lawsuit over ads

Reuters

timean hour ago

  • Reuters

Google fends off part of textbook publisher lawsuit over ads

June 5 (Reuters) - Google (GOOGL.O), opens new tab has convinced a Manhattan federal court to dismiss part of a lawsuit from a group of top educational publishers that accused the tech giant of unlawfully promoting pirated electronic versions of their textbooks. U.S. District Judge Jennifer Rochon said on Wednesday, opens new tab that Cengage Learning ( opens new tab, McGraw Hill, Macmillan Learning and Elsevier failed to support their allegations that Google committed vicarious copyright infringement or violated New York state law. The judge also found, however, that Google could not escape the publishers' trademark infringement claim at an early part of the case. Rochon also allowed a separate publisher claim for contributory copyright infringement to continue, which Google had not yet asked the court to dismiss. The publishers said in a statement on Thursday that they were pleased with the decision to allow some of their claims to move forward, and that dismissing their other claims "will not save Google from having to explain why a company with its resources decided to side with blatant piracy, rather than with creators and copyright holders." A Google spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Thursday. The publishers sued Google last year, arguing that Google searches for their textbooks feature heavily discounted, pirated e-book versions at the top of the results and "drown out" results for the legitimate versions. They said Google ignored thousands of copyright infringement notices and profited from sales of pirated books. Google denied the allegations and said the e-books "are not sold through Google's platform and Google does not share in revenues from such sales." Rochon said in her ruling on Wednesday that the publishers' vicarious copyright infringement claim failed because Google could not control the pirate sellers' alleged misconduct. The judge also rejected Google's request to dismiss the publishers' trademark infringement claim, finding that the tech giant could be responsible for the pirate sellers' misuse of the publishers' trademarks. The case is Cengage Learning Inc v. Google LLC, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, No. 1:24-cv-04274. For the publishers: Matt Oppenheim and Michele Murphy of Oppenheim + Zebrak For Google: Sy Damle, Alli Stillman, Joe Wetzel and Sarah Tomkowiak of Latham & Watkins Read more: Google sued by top textbook publishers over ads for pirated e-books

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store