Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. We may earn a commission if you buy through our links, at no extra cost to you.
The short answer: If you prioritize faster ice production and prefer a more compact footprint, the Opal Ultra is the better value. If you want the larger 3.1-pound ice bin capacity and don’t mind a taller unit, the Opal 2.0 offers more convenience for high-volume use. Both make the same chewable nugget ice that GE is famous for, but the Ultra is newer, produces ice 37% faster, and is generally more affordable.
The first thing you’ll notice is the physical difference. The Opal 2.0 is a tall, cylindrical tower that stands about 17 inches high and has a 3.1-pound ice bin. The Opal Ultra, on the other hand, is shorter and wider, measuring about 13.5 inches tall with a 1.5-pound bin. If you have limited counter space under upper cabinets, the Ultra’s shorter profile is a clear winner. But if you entertain frequently or have a family that goes through ice quickly, the 2.0’s larger bin means you won’t have to empty it as often. The Ultra’s bin is also removable for easy cleaning, while the 2.0 has a pull-out drawer that some users find slightly less convenient.
This is where the Ultra pulls ahead. GE states the Opal Ultra makes up to 38 pounds of ice per day, while the Opal 2.0 makes around 28 pounds per day. That’s a 37% increase in speed. In real-world terms, the Ultra can produce a batch of ice in about 15 minutes, whereas the 2.0 might take 20 to 25 minutes for the same amount. If you’re refilling glasses quickly or hosting a party, the Ultra will keep up better. The trade-off is that the Ultra’s smaller bin fills up faster, so you’ll need to either use the included ice scoop to transfer ice to a freezer bag or be ready to empty it frequently. The 2.0’s larger bin gives you a buffer.
Both machines are not silent, but they have different acoustic profiles. The Opal Ultra is generally quieter, producing a soft whirring and occasional crunching as it forms nuggets. The Opal 2.0 has a slightly deeper hum and a more pronounced “ice crunch” during the harvest cycle. In a quiet kitchen, you’ll notice the 2.0 more, especially during the final few minutes of a cycle. If you plan to keep the machine on overnight or in an office environment, the Ultra’s lower noise is a plus. However, neither is whisper-quiet, so don’t expect silent operation.
Nugget ice makers require regular cleaning to prevent mold and slime buildup, and both models have similar maintenance needs. The Opal Ultra has a removable ice bin that you can wash in the sink, and the interior is accessible for wiping. The Opal 2.0’s bin is not removable; instead, you pull out a drawer, which means you have to scoop out ice to access the interior, making cleaning a bit more tedious. Both have a self-cleaning cycle that uses a citric acid solution (GE sells a specific cleaner, or you can use a generic brand). The Ultra’s shorter height makes it easier to see and reach the interior, which is a slight advantage. For best performance, plan to clean your machine every 1 to 2 weeks, depending on water hardness and usage.
In terms of price, the Opal Ultra typically falls into the mid-range category, while the Opal 2.0 is positioned at a slightly higher price point. However, prices fluctuate, and you can often find the Ultra on sale at a more budget-friendly level. The 2.0 rarely drops below its premium positioning. Given that the Ultra is faster, quieter, and easier to clean, it’s a compelling value. The 2.0’s only major advantage is the larger bin, which might justify the extra cost if you absolutely need it. But for most households, the Ultra is the smarter purchase. If you’re on a budget, consider checking our best ice makers guide for other options, but between these two, the Ultra wins on price and performance.
Before you commit to either model, measure your intended spot carefully. The Opal 2.0’s height of about 17 inches means it needs clearance under upper cabinets, which many standard kitchens have about 18 inches of. However, if you have a low-hanging microwave or a cabinet that sits closer to the counter, the 2.0 may not fit. The Opal Ultra, at around 13.5 inches tall, slides under almost any overhead obstruction. Width and depth also matter: the Ultra is wider, so it takes up more horizontal counter space, while the 2.0 is narrower but taller. If you have a deep but narrow nook, the 2.0 might be the better fit. Also consider the swing of the ice drawer or bin lid. The 2.0’s pull-out drawer requires several inches of forward clearance, while the Ultra’s top-loading bin needs vertical space to lift out. In a tight corner, the Ultra’s removable bin can be a hassle if you can’t lift it straight up. Measure your counter depth, height, and the space in front of the unit before buying. A machine that doesn’t fit is a daily frustration.
Even though both machines have self-cleaning cycles, owners often make mistakes that shorten the lifespan or affect ice quality. First, don’t skip the descaling step. Citric acid cleaner is essential to remove mineral buildup, especially if you have hard water. Running only the rinse cycle won’t cut it. Second, don’t use harsh chemicals like bleach or vinegar in high concentrations; they can damage internal components. Stick to the manufacturer’s recommended cleaner or a citric acid-based solution. Third, don’t leave water sitting in the reservoir for weeks. Stagnant water encourages mold and slime. If you’re going away, drain the unit and dry it out. Fourth, don’t ignore the air filter (if your model has one) or the condenser coils. Dust buildup reduces efficiency and can cause the machine to overheat. Fifth, don’t overfill the bin. Packing ice too high can jam the mechanism. Finally, don’t assume the self-cleaning cycle is enough. You still need to manually wipe down the interior and wash removable parts. Following these steps will keep your nugget ice tasting fresh and extend the life of your investment.
Nugget ice makers are a luxury, not a necessity. If you only use ice occasionally, a standard freezer ice maker or ice cube trays may suffice. Nugget ice makers are best for daily users who love chewable ice, entertain often, or want restaurant-style ice at home. If you have limited counter space and can’t spare a permanent spot, a portable countertop model might not be worth the sacrifice. Also, if you’re not willing to commit to regular cleaning, the machine will develop odors and mold quickly. For those who want nugget ice but don’t need GE’s brand, there are alternatives from brands like Frigidaire, Newair, and Igloo. These often cost less but may have smaller bins or slower production. However, they might not match the Opal’s ice texture. If you need a large volume of ice for parties, a dedicated undercounter ice maker or a refrigerator with an ice maker might be more practical. Finally, if you’re on a tight budget, consider whether the convenience justifies the ongoing cost of cleaner and electricity. For many, the Opal Ultra or 2.0 is worth it, but for others, a simpler solution works just fine.
Yes, both the Opal Ultra and Opal 2.0 produce the same chewable, soft nugget ice that is popular in restaurants and fast-food chains. The texture is identical because they use the same ice-making mechanism.
No, the bins are not interchangeable. The Ultra’s bin is designed to fit its specific unit, and the 2.0’s bin is larger and has a different shape. Stick to the included bin for each model.
The Opal Ultra is better for small kitchens because it’s shorter and fits under standard cabinets. The Opal 2.0 is taller and may not fit if you have low overhead clearance.
We don't accept free units or payment for placement. Our rankings combine verified manufacturer specifications, real owner feedback and availability, compared on one transparent S to C rubric.
Honesty note: We have not hands-on tested every product mentioned on this page. Where we have not personally used a product, any ranking referenced here is based on verified specs, aggregated owner feedback, availability and editorial comparison rather than a hands-on review.