• Related content

Front Image
Controls 1 Photo
Controls 2 Photo
Drawer Photo
Interior Photo
Sides Photo
Back Photo

Even with an internal water heater, the only costs a few dollars a year to run depending on how much electricity runs where you live.


It's true that the uses more water than most front loading washers, but the GE Profile Harmony is relatively miserly when compared to similar top loaders. Most cycles use between 14 and 30 gallons, which isn't bad considering this washer's large capacity.

Using average national energy costs, individual washes run between a few pennies and a quarter. The normal cycle will cost just about a dime every time.


All combined, a year of running the will set you back about $46. That's not bad for a top loading washer, as they usually cost more than $50 per year to operate.


{{ attachments(511d12c0d902ef0ad900000a)
{{ attachments(511d131537fcd79ef500000b)
The normal cycle may be the one that’s used most often, but unfortunately it was the weakest one featured on the PTWN8050MWW. It especially struggled with oil-based stains. If you’ve got particularly dirty clothes, a more intense cycle may be a better idea.

{{ attachments(511d19a5f6d050fdd9000008)
Since the PTWN8050MWW combines its Whites and Heavy Duty cycles, we simply set the soil level to normal from high to simulate a cotton cycle. Performance was very good, taking just a few minutes more than an hour to get stained clothes close to white.

Related content

{{ attachments(511d191c658746ecb7000021)
Not only did the Delicates cycle have trouble getting out stains, but it also failed to protect fragile fabrics. Our test cloths were just as damaged on the Delicates cycle as on the Cotton cycle.

{{ attachments(511d1937e51dba30b1000002)
Other washers do this cycle better. The PTWN8050MWW struggled with oil-based stains and even had trouble removing blood and cocoa.

{{ attachments(511d198072489fefed00000c)

The Quick Wash took almost as long as the Normal cycle to get clothes nowhere near as clean. We suspect that it was due to the inability of the PTWN8050MWW to balance large loads, requiring the washer to fill the drum with water in an attempt to keep some balance.

{{ attachments(511d19be8ab91ad26c000003)
Though it didn’t get as much dirt out as some front loaders we’ve tested, the PTWN8050MWW did a pretty good job compared to its top loading competitors.

{{ attachments(511d195f658746bf2f00003a)
Clothing wear was decidedly uneven, though universally rough. Not even the Delicates cycle was gentle enough for the most fragile fabrics.

When a washer leaves a lot of water in clothes, that means there’s a greater chance they’ll end up smelling musty. It’s also harder for a dryer to get that water out, leading to higher energy bills and longer dry cycles. The PTWN8050MWW didn’t leave any loads particularly soaked, but across the board it didn’t do the best job getting out excess water, either.

Water Retention.jpg

As is expected of a washer in this price class, each cycle can be customized for soil level, spin speed and temperature.

Controls 2 Photo

In addition to a preset for a custom created cycle of your choosing, the also offers a drum cleaning cycle, plus an extra rinse and soak.

Controls 1 Photo

A detergent dispenser lies underneath the door's hinges, and slides out for filling.

Drawer Photo

The large, glass door is cushioned, so it won't slam shut when you close it.

Interior Photo

The washer opening is plenty large, so it's easy to dump large loads of laundry inside the massive drum. Since it's a top loader, those who aren't that tall or have limited mobility may find it difficult to pull out heavy, wet clothes once a wash is complete.

The 's control panel doesn't look foreboding, but it turned out to be quite a source of frustration. The "power" button has a significant delay which means you can cycle the washer's power on and off again if you don't wait a few seconds for it to start up. Other buttons required multiple presses, and the cycle selector usually did not recall which cycle had been used previously. It's too bad, because the GE has a very straightforward panel setup that even technophobes would find easy to understand.

Controls 1 Photo
Controls 2 Photo

We had no qualms about the PTWN8050MWW's energy efficiency. It cost less to run than most top-loading washers we've tested, though most front-loaders cost even less.

The PTWN8050MWW displayed uneven stain removal, dirt removal and clothes wear performance. Some cycles were stellar, while others disappointed. The Speed Wash cycle had trouble balancing a four pound load, and the lack of separate cotton and heavy duty cycles was noticeable.

We found an impressive array of specialty wash cycles and customizable features on the PTWN8050MWW. Its control panel appeared user friendly, but flaky buttons made it difficult to use.

Meet the tester

Keith Barry

Keith Barry

Former Editor in Chief, Reviewed Home


Keith was the Editor in Chief of Reviewed's appliance and automotive sites. His work has appeared in publications such as Wired, Car & Driver, and CityLab.

See all of Keith Barry's reviews

Checking our work.

We use standardized and scientific testing methods to scrutinize every product and provide you with objectively accurate results. If you’ve found different results in your own research, email us and we’ll compare notes. If it looks substantial, we’ll gladly re-test a product to try and reproduce these results. After all, peer reviews are a critical part of any scientific process.

Shoot us an email