This page contains affiliate links. Learn more.
Our Verdict (Best For)
The Frizzlife PD600-TAM3 has a well-made design that’s easy to use and maintain, with ultra-fast filter priming. However, the poorly labeled parts may be confusing for first-time installers. On the plus side, filtration was solid in our lab testing, and we enjoyed the nice mineral taste of the filtered water. But, a serious strike against the Frizzlife is the methylene chloride we detected post-filtration (below the strictest health guidelines). More cons: The system lacks NSF certifications/testing for contaminant reduction, it’s a little noisy, and we aren’t fans of having to monitor the TDS display under the sink. Finally, we measured a low pure-to-drain ratio but automatic flushing used to counter TDS creep and extend RO membrane life wastes additional water. Bottom line: A solid under sink RO especially given the affordable costs, but there are better options out there.
The Frizzlife PD600-TAM3 is a tankless under sink reverse osmosis system that requires a plumbing connection. It’s designed for use as a drinking water filter and can purify municipal water (not well water).
As usual, we’ve tested the system with our own hands:
- Hands-on experience: We installed/assembled, used, and maintained it.
- Filtration effectiveness: We sent an unfiltered and a filtered tap water sample to a professional lab for analysis in order to determine real-life contaminant reduction capabilities (and remineralization). Plus, we checked for NSF certifications and other test data.
- More testing: We performed a taste & odor test, a filtration speed test, and a wastewater test.
- All other product aspects: We considered initial + long-term cost, product warranties, additional features, frequent customer complaints, etc.
Contents
Final Rating: /5.00
FiltrationFiltration score combines our lab results and taste testing with NSF/ANSI certifications and 3rd-party contaminant reduction data.: /5.00
Usability: /5.00
CostsCost scores reflect overall value for money rather than price alone.: /5.00
| Type: | Under Sink Reverse Osmosis System |
| PriceNo short-term sales. (May 5, 2025): | $469.99 (Use Code BOSPD2410 for $120 Off!) |
| Yearly CostEstimate is based on rated/claimed filter life and 1,000 gallons annual water consumption. No short-term sales. (May 5, 2025): | ~$110 |
(Use Code BOSPD2410 for $120 Off!)
Final Rating: /5.00
What We Like Most
- Achieved good results in our lab testing for contaminant reduction.
- Filtered water tasted and smelled clean, with a pleasant mineral flavor (thanks to remineralization stage).
- Fairly easy to install and very fast to prime, with customizable tubing length for easier installation and a tool for releasing quick-connect fittings.
- Easy to use and maintain.
- Sleek design, looks and feels well-made with a simple yet solid faucet.
- We measured a low pure-to-drain ratio.
- Automatic flushing counters TDS creep and extends RO membrane lifespan (system also has manual flush).
- Filter life indicator.
- Below-average purchase and maintenance costs.
What We Don’t Like
- Methylene chloride appeared in filtered water, but below strictest health guidelines.
- No NSF certifications and no 3rd-party testing for contaminant reduction.
- Setup included not clearly labeled parts that might be confusing for first-time users.
- Faucet flow isn’t the fastest and there’s a slight delay in dispensing water.
- Noisier than similar systems.
- Automatic flushing wastes additional water.
- Must look under the sink to monitor the digital TDS display.
- 3rd-party customers complained about leaking, malfunctioning filter change indicators, and customer service issues.
How the Frizzlife PD600-TAM3 Compares to…
10 Other Under Sink Reverse Osmosis Systems
In this video, Sara highlights our under sink RO top picks. The Frizzlife PD600-TAM3 was included in our testing, but didn’t make the cut.
Please note: Our full guide on the best under sink reverse osmosis systems is available here.
Video Chapters + Comparison Sheet
- Link to Comparison Sheet
- 00:00 – Intro
- 00:22 – What’s New?
- 01:11 – Our 11 Under Sink ROs
- 01:54 – How We Tested & Rated
- 05:08 – Our Recommendations
- 06:11 – Best Overall (Cloud RO)
- 20:57 – 2 Best Tankless Units (Waterdrop G3P600 & X12)
- 35:38 – Highest Filtration Score (Aquasana SmartFlow)
- 37:22 – Made in USA (USWS All American & Home Master TMHP-L)
- 41:28 – Budget Pick (APEC ROES-50 Essence)
- 42:50 – Summary
18 Other Under Sink Water Filters
In this video, Sara highlights our under sink water filter top picks. The Frizzlife PD600-TAM3 was included in our testing, but didn’t make the cut.
Please note: Our full guide on the best under sink water filters is available here.
Video Chapters + Comparison Sheet
- Link to Comparison Sheet
- 00:00 – Intro
- 00:34 – How We Tested & Rated
- 01:53 – Our Recommendations
- 03:01 – Best Overall (Cloud RO)
- 15:11 – 2 Best Tankless ROs (Waterdrop G3P600 & X12)
- 27:26 – Best Non-RO Filter (Epic Smart Shield)
- 31:22 – Highest Filtration Score (Aquasana SmartFlow)
- 32:02 – Made in USA (USWS All American & Home Master TMHP-L)
- 32:34 – Budget RO Pick (APEC ROES-50 Essence)
- 32:51 – AO Smith AO-US-200 & Culligan US-EZ-4
- 33:34 – Summary
Full Analysis of the Frizzlife PD600-TAM3
Filtration: /5.00
1. Lab Results: /5.00
Remember that our before vs after lab comparison is not an exact science. It’s informational and subject to variability, inaccuracies, and interferences caused by natural fluctuations in water quality, accidental contamination, human error, instrumentation issues, and more. Furthermore, our lab-testing is limited to those contaminants present in our water supplies and at their respective concentrations. As such, it can only give us a general idea for how effective a certain water treatment product might be.
Lab Results Chart (Filtration)
| Potentially Harmful | Aesthetic Issues | Feed Water Level | Filtered Water Level | Reduction Rate | |
| Water Disinfectants | |||||
| Chlorine (mg/L) | ✖ | ✖ | 1.52 | 0 | 100% |
| Disinfection Byproducts | |||||
| Bromodichloromethane (µg/L) | ✖ | 2.47 | 0 | 100% | |
| Bromoform (µg/L) | ✖ | 2.85 | 0 | 100% | |
| Dibromochloromethane (µg/L) | ✖ | 3.92 | 0 | 100% | |
| Chloroform (µg/L) | ✖ | 1.18 | 0 | 100% | |
| Metals | |||||
| Copper (mg/L) | ✖ | ✖ | 0.06 | 0 | 100% |
| Barium (mg/L) | ✖ | 0.05 | 0 | 100% | |
| Boron (mg/L) | ✖ | 0.06 | 0.04 | 33% | |
| Zinc (mg/L) | ✖ | 0.01 | 0 | 100% | |
| Lithium (mg/L) | ✖ | 0.01 | 0 | 100% | |
| Strontium (mg/L) | ✖ | 0.5 | 0.05 | 90% | |
| Salts | |||||
| Nitrate (N) (mg/L) | ✖ | 1.59 | 0 | 100% | |
| Fluoride (mg/L) | ✖ | 0.35 | 0.16 | 54% | |
| Other | |||||
| Uranium (µg/L) | ✖ | 1 | 0 | 100% | |
| RO Salt Rejection | |||||
| TDS (mg/L) | ✖ | 296.4 | 42 | 86% (Uses Remineralization) | |
| Impurities NOT Detected in Unfiltered Tap Water Sample | |||||
| Methylene Chloride (µg/L) | ✖ | 0 | 1.43 | ||
| Explanation: | |||||
| Full Removal | |||||
| Considerable Reduction | |||||
| Concentration More Than Double of Unfiltered Water Sample | |||||
| Potential Leaching Reached or Exceeded the Strictest Public Health Guideline We Could Find | |||||
Lab Results Chart (Remineralization)
| Frizzlife PD600-TAM3 | Health Guidelines | Average of Non-Remineralization Under Sink RO Systems We Tested |
|
| Minerals | |||
| Magnesium (mg/L) | 0.24 | Minimum Level: 10 Optimum Level: 20-30 Source: WHO |
0.38 |
| Calcium (mg/L) | 10.28 | Minimum Level: 20 Optimum Level: ~50 Source: WHO |
1.74 |
| pH & Alkalinity | |||
| pH | 6.99 | No Health Guideline | 6.91 |
| Alkalinity (mg/L) | 22.5 | 30 to 400 (IDPH) | Most <20 |
| Explanation: | |||
| Within Range of Health Guideline | |||
| Not Within Range of Health Guideline |
*100% means reduction to below the minimum detection level. To learn more about our testing procedures check our editorial guidelines.
**Our remineralization lab results reflect water dispensed immediately after purification, representing the shortest possible contact time between purified RO water and remineralization media — a baseline scenario for mineral concentration. We used this approach to ensure consistency across all tested RO systems. Actual remineralization performance during regular everyday use is likely better but can vary significantly.
Link to Filtered Water Report
Link to Unfiltered Water Report
Usability: /5.00
Costs: /5.00
Please note: This page is still a work in progress. Additional content and details will be added shortly – stay tuned!
Further Reading
About the Author(s)
Sara has been a lifelong home-improvement fan (she’s been hooked on This Old House since she was five) and taught herself any project she didn’t already know by watching YouTube tutorials. She is also an award-winning filmmaker. Armed with this skillset, Sara installs, primes, samples, uses, and maintains nearly every point-of-use water treatment systems we test – then brings her results to life on camera for our YouTube channel.
Raoul has a background in mechanical engineering and has been writing about home water treatment since 2015. He designs our product review processes, analyzes the results, and ties everything together. As editor-in-chief, he tries hard to keep the whole operation running smoothly behind the scenes.