Notebookcheck

Fujitsu LifeBook U937 (Core i5, Full-HD) Laptop Review

Christian Hintze (translated by Katherine Bodner), 08/04/2017

Security Business Smaller, slimmer, more secure – this could be the new motto of the top-range ultra-mobile business sector. The U937 is hoping to overtake its competition with a weight of 950 grams (~2.1 lb), a lot of security features and LTE support. Find out if it has succeeded in our detailed review.

For the original German review, click here.

The LifeBook U series is Fujitsu’s top-range business class. We reviewed the LifeBook U747 in March and gave it 87%. Now, Fujitsu has presented another, even slimmer business subnotebook. The display has shrunk from 14 to 13.3 inches and the device itself weighs only 950 grams (~2.1 lb) – less than a carton of milk, which makes it one of the lightest notebooks available. Fujitsu is marketing the device towards businesses and has included a lot of security features such as a palm vein or fingerprint sensor and a smart card slot.

The Fujitsu U937 is available in several configurations with various processors, RAM sizes, storage devices, LTE and Wi-Fi options, fingerprint vs. palm vein sensors etc. We will mention the various hardware options available in each relevant segment. 

We will be comparing our test unit with the Asus AsusPro B9440UA, the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon, the HP Spectre 13, the Dell XPS 13 and the Toshiba Portégé X30. All of these devices boast good portability, an elegant design and good office performance. After this detailed comparison, we will know if our test unit is a business dream come true.

HP Spectre 13 Asus AsusPro B9440UA Dell XPS 13 9360 Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Toshiba Portégé X30
CPU Intel Core i7-7500U Intel Core i5-7200U Intel Core i5-7200U Intel Core i5-7200U Intel Core i7-7600U
GPU Intel HD Graphics 620 Intel HD Graphics 620 Intel HD Graphics 620 Intel HD Graphics 620 Intel HD Graphics 620
Panel 13.3 inch 1920x1080 14 inch 1920x1080 13.3 inch 1920x1080 14 inch 1920x1080 13.3 inch 1920x1080
RAM 8 GB LPDDR3-1866 8 GB DDR3L-2133 8 GB LPDDR3-1866 8 GB LPDDR3-1866 16 GB DDR4-2400
Price 1.599 Euro 1.100 Euro 1.050 Euro 1.669 Euro 2.100 Euro
Fujitsu LifeBook U937
Graphics adapter
Memory
8192 MB 
, 1x 4GB soldered on + 1x 4GB-DIMM, max. 20 GB
Display
13.3 inch 16:9, 1920x1080 pixel 166 PPI, Sharp SHP1483, LQ133M1JW28, IPS, glossy: no
Mainboard
Intel Kaby Lake-U iHDCP 2.2 Premium PCH
Storage
Samsung CM871a MZNTY256HDHP, 256 GB 
, SATA 6GB/s, 200 GB free
Soundcard
Intel Kaby Lake-U/Y PCH - High Definition Audio
Connections
3 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 HDMI, 1 Kensington Lock, Audio Connections: combined headphone and microphone jack (3.5 mm), Card Reader: SD card reader , 1 SmartCard, 1 Fingerprint Reader
Networking
Intel Ethernet Connection I219-LM (10/100/1000MBit), Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265 (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 4.2, 4G/LTE SIM Slot, LTE
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 15.5 x 309.3 x 213.5 ( = 0.61 x 12.18 x 8.41 in)
Battery
50 Wh Lithium-Ion, 4 cells, Battery runtime (according to manufacturer): 11 h
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: HD Webcam
Primary Camera: 1.2 MPix 720p videos
Additional features
Speakers: stereo speakers, Keyboard: chiclet, Keyboard Light: no, power supply, recovery DVD, Quick Start Guide, LTE connection manager, CyberLink YouCam, driver DVD/Recovery DVD, 24 Months Warranty, Collect & Return Service
Weight
950 g ( = 33.51 oz / 2.09 pounds), Power Supply: 365 g ( = 12.88 oz / 0.8 pounds)
Price
1500 Euro

 

Case

Maximum opening angle: almost 180°
Maximum opening angle: almost 180°

According to the manufacturer, the case is made of a very light and robust metal: magnesium. But it seems as if the case is actually made of two kinds of material. One for the top of the base unit, where the keyboard is set into. This is very stable and has a smoother surface than the bottom of the base unit and display cover. The latter is very slim and warps easily – it generally does not appear very stable. The material feels more like plastic with a (magnesium) coating. The keyboard, however, seems very robust and can hardly be twisted at all. The same can be said for the hinges that reliably hold the display cover in place. The subnotebook can be opened to almost 180°.

The colors of the case go from dark gray to black and the surface is decorated with a colored and very slightly raised logo. Overall, the design is simple but elegant – just as you would expect from a business device. The large smart card slot at the front left side and our model's fingerprint sensor at the bottom right of the keyboard are quite noticeable. 

Unfortunately, the battery cannot be removed and expansion options seem to be limited as one of the two 4-GB RAM modules is even soldered onto the motherboard. But we will go into that a bit more later on.

Working For Notebookcheck

Are you a loyal reader of notebookcheck? Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team!

Especially wanted: 
German-English-Translator - Details here
Review Editor - 
Details here
News Editor - Details here

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The case of the U937 really is one of the smallest of all our comparison devices. If you look at its length and width, only the Dell XPS 13 is a little smaller, but it is also the heaviest comparison device at 1.2 kg (~2.6 lb). The 15.5 mm (~0.61 in) thickness, however, seems to be a standard among the competition. Only the HP Spectre 13 is even slimmer than the rest with an unbelievable 10.4 mm (~0.41 in). But again, that device is a lot larger than the comparison devices, despite having the same display size. 

Looking at weight, the Fujitsu, again, is in pole position. 950 grams (~2.1 lb) is simply unbeatable. The Toshiba also weighs only 1 kg (~2.2 lb), but all others are another 100 to 200 g (~3.5 to ~7 oz) heavier. Then of course, you have to add the weight of the power supply (365 g/~13 oz)) which weighs almost half as much as the notebook itself. 

Size Comparison

Connectivity

Considering that we are talking about an ultra-light notebook, Fujitsu is very liberal in terms of ports and additional features – unlike the AsusPro. The device is equipped with a fully-fledged USB 3.0 Type-A port on either side, one of which even supports “Anytime USB Charge” which lets you charge connected devices even when the computer is turned off. However, the laptop has only one USB 3.1 Type-C port of the first generation, so it does not support Thunderbolt, but has a Power Delivery function. 

You can connect an external monitor via the fully-fledged HDMI port that supports resolutions of up to 4096x2160 pixels. The fingerprint sensor will be a welcome addition for fans of biometric data protection and transfer, but there are also models available with a palm vein sensor. The large smart card reader is a great highlight for businesses as it enables you to double protect the device - with a password plus a chip card. 

Fujitsu has also done a good job in terms of positioning the ports: USB Type-A ports, which can often require a lot of space, are placed at a short distance to ports that require very little space, such as the audio jack or the USB Type-C port.

right: SIM slot, SD card reader, USB 3.0 Type-A, LAN, Kensington Lock
right: SIM slot, SD card reader, USB 3.0 Type-A, LAN, Kensington Lock
left: power supply, HDMI, USB 3.1 Type-C (Power Delivery), USB 3.0 Type-A (Charge Always), microphone/headphone jack
left: power supply, HDMI, USB 3.1 Type-C (Power Delivery), USB 3.0 Type-A (Charge Always), microphone/headphone jack
back: ventilation slots
back: ventilation slots

SD card reader

We always use the same reference card to test the SD card reader - a Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II. The transfer rates that we measured were very good in the copy test and the Fujitsu made first place once again. It beat the Dell by 30%. 

The read test brought slightly different results: here, the Dell was faster by 38%, but our Fujitsu U937 still managed second place. The Toshiba took the third place and was behind by 50%. Overall, our test unit did very well. 

SDCardreader Transfer Speed
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Fujitsu LifeBook U937
(Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
153 MB/s ∼100%
Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5
(Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
107.8 MB/s ∼70% -30%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE
(Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
71.4 MB/s ∼47% -53%
Toshiba Portege X30-D (PT274U-01N001)
(Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
63.2 MB/s ∼41% -59%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5
(Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
250.6 MB/s ∼100% +38%
Fujitsu LifeBook U937
(Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
181.5 MB/s ∼72%
Toshiba Portege X30-D (PT274U-01N001)
(Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
89.6 MB/s ∼36% -51%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE
(Toshiba Exceria Pro M401)
87.5 MB/s ∼35% -52%

Communication

The U937 impressed us with its additional communication options. Apart from LAN and Wi-Fi with integrated Bluetooth 4.2, the subnotebook also has a SIM card slot with 4G/LTE support. The latter offers a Sierra Wireless EM7455 LTE modem with 2 LTE antennas and supports downloads of up to 300 MBit/s and uploads of 50 MBit/s

The Wi-Fi module with its two dual-band Wi-Fi antennas from Intel had very good results downstream and, once again, our test unit managed to position itself at the top of our comparison table. The Toshiba’s results were 5% lower, the rest of our comparison devices were between 15 and 30% slower. The Fujitsu’s performance dropped a little upstream and only performed averagely. The winner here was the Lenovo which had an advantage of 30% while the slowest device, the AsusPro, was only 10% behind our Fujitsu U937.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Fujitsu LifeBook U937
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
678 MBit/s ∼100%
Toshiba Portege X30-D (PT274U-01N001)
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
647 MBit/s ∼95% -5%
Asus ASUSPRO B9440UA-GV0100T
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8260
578 MBit/s ∼85% -15%
Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
525 MBit/s ∼77% -23%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
517 MBit/s ∼76% -24%
HP Spectre 13-v131ng
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8260
485 MBit/s ∼72% -28%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
674 MBit/s ∼100% +31%
HP Spectre 13-v131ng
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8260
663 MBit/s ∼98% +29%
Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
575 MBit/s ∼85% +12%
Fujitsu LifeBook U937
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
515 MBit/s ∼76%
Toshiba Portege X30-D (PT274U-01N001)
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
488 MBit/s ∼72% -5%
Asus ASUSPRO B9440UA-GV0100T
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8260
463 MBit/s ∼69% -10%

Security

fingerprint sensor
fingerprint sensor

Once again, Fujitsu has tried to go a step further than its competition. In addition to the mandatory Kensington Lock the device is equipped with TPM 2.0 and, depending on the model, either a fingerprint sensor or a palm vein sensor.

The palm vein sensor recognizes the individual pattern of veins and arteries on your palm and fingers via optical sensors and calculations. The security feature works without touch; you simply have to hold your palm over the sensor. We were not able to test this feature as our test unit was a version equipped with a fingerprint sensor, which is positioned at the front right side of the base unit.

The device offers one more security feature: the smart card slot. This enables users to additionally lock their computers, protecting them from strangers and data theft with the help of an ID chip card that needs to be used in combination with user name and password to access the computer. This can be useful especially for company notebooks. Unfortunately, we do not have an ID card with which we could test this function, so it was deactivated. 

Accessories

Fujitsu was sparing with its accessories: The comparatively large “Accessory Box” only contained a power supply, a driver DVD and a Quick Start guide. Perhaps it is filled better with the more expensive versions. The driver DVD is quite a surprise as the slim device does not have an optical drive: You would have to connect an external drive or use a second computer in order to make use of the DVD. Asus has done a better job and equipped its device with a bag and port replicator. 

The manufacturer does offer some additional accessories on its website. You can take a look at the available accessories here.

Maintenance

Ultra and subnotebooks rarely have a maintenance hatch or exchangeable battery and neither does the Fujitsu U937. The cover of the base unit is fixed with 12 Phillips screws that can be removed easily and there are no hidden screws. Once the screws have been removed the entire cover can be taken off and you can access all components such as the battery, the cooling fan, RAM, SSD etc. This is a great advantage of the Fujitsu and you should have no difficulties cleaning the cooling fan or changing some components.

eleven screws on the sides and one screw in the middle
eleven screws on the sides and one screw in the middle
loosen the screws and remove the bottom cover - it's simple
loosen the screws and remove the bottom cover - it's simple

Warranty

The Japanese manufacturer offers a one-year international warranty, and replacement parts are supposed to be available for 5 years after the end of the product life. Additionally, the manufacturer offers regular product services.

Input Devices

Keyboard

keyboard
keyboard

The normal keys are 19 mm (~0.75 in) wide and have a key travel of 1.2 mm (~0.05 in). As usual, the F-keys are a little smaller. It took us a while to get used to the short travel, which also makes the pressure point a little firmer. After that, typing was easy. There are clear gaps between all keys, which is why the keys are so small. The font is easy to read.

The stable wrist rest means that the keyboard does not bend noticeably while typing. The volume of the keys while typing is still OK. It can be a bit bothersome in quiet surroundings, particularly as the space bar is a little louder than the rest and does not give an impression of high quality.

The Fn key offers the usual special functions, but the device lacks keyboard backlighting. This is not available even optionally, which really is a No-Go in this price range. There are some special functions connected to the f keys. This means that pressing the F4 key, for example, increases the volume, but it also means that if you want to close a window you have to press FN+ALT+F4, which is rather complicated and takes some getting used to.

The power button is at the top right side and luckily is not directly integrated with the keyboard. The keyboard is splash-proof.

Touchpad

Touchpad
Touchpad

The touchpad of our device's sister model LifeBook U747 was not very convincing and the same can be said for the current model. Gliding is OK, but the touchpad is rather small due to the separate keys. Sometimes it took several attempts before the touchpad reacted to your clicks; it is not very sensitive.

The touchpad is not an official precision touchpad. It registers two-finger gestures quite well and you can flip though open apps with three fingers, but other three or four-finger gestures did not work in our test; and you would have trouble using these gestures anyway due to the limited space.

The touchpad keys do not seem to be of particularly high quality and especially the left key rattles even just gliding over to it from the right key. The clicking sounds are a little loud too and should be improved.

Display

Fujitsu has equipped our test unit with a full HD IPS panel from Sharp. The manufacturer claims a viewing angle of 85% from all sides. The display is matte, but there is also a version with a glossy touch display.

The maximum brightness is at 383 cd/m2 and could theoretically beat its competition. Unfortunately, brightness distribution is at only 81%, which is the worst result of all comparison devices, which means the screen "only" reaches an average brightness of 343 cd/m2. Our test unit still manages to reach second place behind the HP Spectre

Our device's display is the only one out of all comparison devices that uses PWM to regulate screen brightness. The display turns on and off at a frequency of over 200 Hz, which might be a problem for sensitive users. However, it only uses PWM at a brightness of 20% or below. We noticed no backlight bleeding during our review.

361
cd/m²
383
cd/m²
370
cd/m²
354
cd/m²
353
cd/m²
352
cd/m²
320
cd/m²
309
cd/m²
318
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 383 cd/m² Average: 346.7 cd/m² Minimum: 30.8 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 81 %
Center on Battery: 350 cd/m²
Contrast: 1070:1 (Black: 0.33 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.5 | - Ø
ΔE Greyscale 4.9 | - Ø
98.1% sRGB (Argyll) 63.5% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll)
Gamma: 2.21
Fujitsu LifeBook U937
Sharp SHP1483, LQ133M1JW28, , 1920x1080, 13.3
Asus ASUSPRO B9440UA-GV0100T
AU Optronics AUO353D / B140HAN03.5, , 1920x1080, 14
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE
B140HAN03_1, , 1920x1080, 14
HP Spectre 13-v131ng
CMN1374, , 1920x1080, 13.3
Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5
Sharp SHP1449 LQ133M1, , 1920x1080, 13.3
Toshiba Portege X30-D (PT274U-01N001)
Toshiba TOS508F, , 1920x1080, 13.3
Response Times
-39%
-37%
-41%
-25%
-21%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
39.2 (20.4, 18.8)
48.8 (18, 30.8)
-24%
48 (22, 26)
-22%
46 (26, 20)
-17%
32.8 (16, 16.8)
16%
36.8 (18.8, 18)
6%
Response Time Black / White *
20 (9.2, 10.8)
30.8 (8, 22.8)
-54%
30.4 (18.8, 11.6)
-52%
33 (21, 12)
-65%
33.2 (10.8, 22.4)
-66%
29.6 (17.2, 12.4)
-48%
PWM Frequency
211.9 (20)
Screen
-25%
11%
-10%
-10%
12%
Brightness
347
294
-15%
271
-22%
382
10%
325
-6%
323
-7%
Brightness Distribution
81
87
7%
91
12%
91
12%
89
10%
86
6%
Black Level *
0.33
0.26
21%
0.16
52%
0.35
-6%
0.195
41%
0.28
15%
Contrast
1070
1227
15%
1738
62%
1154
8%
1801
68%
1188
11%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
3.5
7.1
-103%
4.5
-29%
5.37
-53%
7.4
-111%
2.6
26%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
4.9
9.61
-96%
3.2
35%
6.44
-31%
6.71
-37%
2.5
49%
Gamma
2.21 109%
2.33 103%
2.02 119%
2.52 95%
2.74 88%
2.12 113%
CCT
7136 91%
6021 108%
7042 92%
6738 96%
7222 90%
6720 97%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
63.5
54.01
-15%
57
-10%
58
-9%
50.48
-21%
62
-2%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
98.1
83.02
-15%
87.5
-11%
89
-9%
73.31
-25%
94
-4%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-32% / -28%
-13% / 2%
-26% / -16%
-18% / -13%
-5% / 5%

* ... smaller is better

The black value is not great at 0.33 cd/m² and the contrast of 1070:1 is commendable, but still not as good as the other displays in the comparison devices. This loss of points could have been avoided.

Apart from good brightness values, the device also has good ColorChecker and gray scale values, offers acceptable reaction times and has great color space coverage (sRGB 98.1%, AdobeRGB: 63.1%).

Subjectively there is not much to criticize: the image seems sharp, colors are rich, black appears dark and it can handle fast scrolling.

CalMAN: gray scales
CalMAN: gray scales
CalMAN: gray scales (after calibration)
CalMAN: gray scales (after calibration)
CalMAN: color saturation
CalMAN: color saturation
CalMAN: color saturation (after calibration)
CalMAN: color saturation (after calibration)
CalMAN: ColorChecker
CalMAN: ColorChecker
CalMAN: ColorChecker (after calibration)
CalMAN: ColorChecker (after calibration)
sRGB (98%)
sRGB (98%)
AdobeRGB (63%)
AdobeRGB (63%)
full sunlight
full sunlight

The good brightness value of 347 cd/m2 and the matte surface mean that the office notebook can be used outdoors quite well. The maximum brightness remains the same in battery mode and the screen can be read very well under an overcast sky but you can even continue working in direct sunlight. You can see the worst case in the image below: we positioned the screen so that the sun shone directly at it.

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
20 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 9.2 ms rise
↘ 10.8 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 14 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (26.6 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
39.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 20.4 ms rise
↘ 18.8 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 41 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (42.4 ms).

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM detected 211.9 Hz20 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 211.9 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 20 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 211.9 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below.

In comparison: 54 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8499 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Typically for an IPS display, our screen has good viewing-angle stability. The manufacturer states viewing angles of 85° on all sides; the image below shows the display from viewing angles of 45°. Of course the screen loses a little brightness, but the image remains very clear.

viewing angles: slightly less brightness from the sides, but good overall
viewing angles: slightly less brightness from the sides, but good overall

Performance

Fujitsu’s U937 is available with various hardware configurations and these can have a big influence on the device’s performance. First of all, the notebook is available with three different processors, which all belong to Intel’s Kaby Lake generation. The processor that our model is equipped with is a Core i5-7200U; the other two options are an i5-7300U and an i7-7600U, which both have higher clock rates.

The test unit is equipped with 8 GB of working memory, but there are other versions with 4 GB and 16 GB. 4 GB of RAM are firmly soldered onto the processor in our model, and the other 4 GB of RAM are connected via a DIMM slot.

Internal storage ranges from 128 GB to 512 GB with six different versions. Two of them have an SSD with a PCIe connection while our model and the other versions have to make do with a SATA III SSD.

Our device is equipped with the HD Graphics 620, integrated into the Kaby Lake processor. As it does not have its own memory, it shares the system RAM.

Overall, our test unit’s components should offer problem-free use in the office. The version with only 4 GB of RAM might not be fit for today’s standards; apart from that CPU, RAM and the SSD should enable good performance for office work and surfing the web.

 

Processor

Our test unit is equipped with an Intel Core i5-7200U. The processor has two cores and supports Hyperthreading for working up to four threads simultaneously. It clocks at between 2.5 and 3.1 GHz and is a fast processor from Intel’s Kaby Lake series. The processor has an integrated graphics unit, the Intel HD Graphics 620. It has a higher clock rate compared to its predecessor and should be able to support more demanding tasks as well as managing multitasking. You can find more information about the CPU here

There are two other processor versions for this laptop: the i5-7300U and the i7-7600U. Both are faster, have a higher clock rate and support Intel’s vPro technology. But our test unit should already be able to master all necessary tasks easily. 

Apart from the Toshiba and the HP Spectre, all comparison devices are equipped with the same CPU. The Toshiba Portégé X30 has a Core i7-7600U that clocks between 2.8 and 3.9 GHz, which is quite a bit higher than the i5-7200U.

The Fujitsu had no difficulties during our 30-minute Cinebench loop and had a constant clock rate of about 3.1 GHz. There was no throttling and the cores heated up to just under 20 °C (~68°F). The Ultrabook keeps up its performance even on battery. There was no change in the clock rate and the Cinebench score was almost the same as well. 

0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330Tooltip
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit

Most comparison devices showed similar results in the Cinebench test, with only 1 to 5% difference – after all, they all have the same processor. Only the HP Spectre can reach better results in the Single CPU test due to its higher clock rate, but falls back in the Multi CPU test. The Fujitsu is somewhere in the middle.

Cinebench R15
Cinebench R15
Cinebench R15 in battery mode
Cinebench R15 in battery mode
Cinebench R10
Cinebench R10
Cinebench R11.5
Cinebench R11.5
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
HP Spectre 13-v131ng
Intel Core i7-7500U
140 Points ∼100% +15%
Asus ASUSPRO B9440UA-GV0100T
Intel Core i5-7200U
127 Points ∼91% +4%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE
Intel Core i5-7200U
126 Points ∼90% +3%
Toshiba Portege X30-D (PT274U-01N001)
Intel Core i7-7600U
126 Points ∼90% +3%
Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5
Intel Core i5-7200U
124 Points ∼89% +2%
Fujitsu LifeBook U937
Intel Core i5-7200U
122 Points ∼87%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Toshiba Portege X30-D (PT274U-01N001)
Intel Core i7-7600U
341 Points ∼100% +5%
Fujitsu LifeBook U937
Intel Core i5-7200U
324 Points ∼95%
Asus ASUSPRO B9440UA-GV0100T
Intel Core i5-7200U
321 Points ∼94% -1%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE
Intel Core i5-7200U
321 Points ∼94% -1%
Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5
Intel Core i5-7200U
318 Points ∼93% -2%
HP Spectre 13-v131ng
Intel Core i7-7500U
314 Points ∼92% -3%
Cinebench R10
Rendering Single CPUs 64Bit
HP Spectre 13-v131ng
Intel Core i7-7500U
7265 Points ∼100% +28%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE
Intel Core i5-7200U
6404 Points ∼88% +13%
Fujitsu LifeBook U937
Intel Core i5-7200U
5663 Points ∼78%
Rendering Multiple CPUs 64Bit
HP Spectre 13-v131ng
Intel Core i7-7500U
14408 Points ∼100% +11%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE
Intel Core i5-7200U
14137 Points ∼98% +9%
Fujitsu LifeBook U937
Intel Core i5-7200U
13012 Points ∼90%
Cinebench R11.5
CPU Single 64Bit
Toshiba Portege X30-D (PT274U-01N001)
Intel Core i7-7600U
1.68 Points ∼100% +24%
Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5
Intel Core i5-7200U
1.45 Points ∼86% +7%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE
Intel Core i5-7200U
1.45 Points ∼86% +7%
Fujitsu LifeBook U937
Intel Core i5-7200U
1.36 Points ∼81%
HP Spectre 13-v131ng
Intel Core i7-7500U
1.35 Points ∼80% -1%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Toshiba Portege X30-D (PT274U-01N001)
Intel Core i7-7600U
3.82 Points ∼100% +9%
Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5
Intel Core i5-7200U
3.61 Points ∼95% +3%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE
Intel Core i5-7200U
3.53 Points ∼92% +1%
Fujitsu LifeBook U937
Intel Core i5-7200U
3.5 Points ∼92%
HP Spectre 13-v131ng
Intel Core i7-7500U
3.45 Points ∼90% -1%
Cinebench R10 Rendering Multiple CPUs 64Bit
13012 Points
Cinebench R10 Rendering Single CPUs 64Bit
5663 Points
Cinebench R10 Shading 64Bit
8291 Points
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64Bit
3.5 Points
Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64Bit
31.22 fps
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64Bit
1.36 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
122 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
324 Points
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
97.7 %
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
16.62 fps
Help

System Performance

PCMark8 Home Score
PCMark8 Home Score
PCMark8 Work Score
PCMark8 Work Score

It is not surprising that our test unit has similar results as its comparison devices, as all models (except for the Toshiba and HP) are equipped with the same CPU and 8 GB of RAM. The slight differences are mainly due to throttling or the SSD. 

Only the Toshiba and the HP could set themselves apart from the other devices in the Work Score of the PCMark 8 benchmark, in the Home Score it was the HP and the Lenovo that were ahead by about 5%. But even here, the differences are very small and basically it can be said that all comparison devices have very similar performance.

We have nothing to complain about the performance speed of the Fujitsu LifeBook in everyday working conditions. Starting up the computer as well as working with office and online applications is fast and everything works smoothly without any lagging.

PCMark 8
Work Score Accelerated v2
HP Spectre 13-v131ng
HD Graphics 620, 7500U, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP
5053 Points ∼100% +11%
Toshiba Portege X30-D (PT274U-01N001)
HD Graphics 620, 7600U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
4910 Points ∼97% +8%
Asus ASUSPRO B9440UA-GV0100T
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, Micron SSD 1100 (MTFDDAV256TBN)
4630 Points ∼92% +2%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, Toshiba THNSF5256GPUK
4602 Points ∼91% +1%
Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5256GPUK
4568 Points ∼90% +1%
Fujitsu LifeBook U937
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, Samsung CM871a MZNTY256HDHP
4538 Points ∼90%
Home Score Accelerated v2
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, Toshiba THNSF5256GPUK
3824 Points ∼100% +6%
HP Spectre 13-v131ng
HD Graphics 620, 7500U, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP
3789 Points ∼99% +5%
Asus ASUSPRO B9440UA-GV0100T
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, Micron SSD 1100 (MTFDDAV256TBN)
3714 Points ∼97% +3%
Fujitsu LifeBook U937
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, Samsung CM871a MZNTY256HDHP
3601 Points ∼94%
Toshiba Portege X30-D (PT274U-01N001)
HD Graphics 620, 7600U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
3543 Points ∼93% -2%
Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5256GPUK
3535 Points ∼92% -2%
PCMark 10 - Score
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, Toshiba THNSF5256GPUK
3214 Points ∼100% +46%
Fujitsu LifeBook U937
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, Samsung CM871a MZNTY256HDHP
2198 Points ∼68%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
3601 points
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
4538 points
Help

Storage Devices

Our test unit’s storage comes from a 256-GB SSD from Samsung. The storage device is on 143rd place in our hard drive benchmarks. For more information, click here

Despite Samsung’s good name as a manufacturer of fast SSDs, this model is not particularly convincing. Of course the SSD is still a lot faster than normal hard drives, but in our direct comparison it could only keep up with the AsusPro. The Toshiba and the HP Spectre in particular had great results in this area, but the Lenovo and Dell also have better results than our Fujitsu.

There is a simple explanation for this difference in performance: While our SSD is connected via SATA III, most of our comparison devices have faster NVMe SSDs with PCIe. There are versions of the Fujitsu LifeBook U937 that are equipped with NVMe SSDs, but these are more expensive.

Anyway, the difference is not particularly important during day-to-day use, unless you have to regularly copy large amounts of data.

Fujitsu LifeBook U937
Samsung CM871a MZNTY256HDHP
Asus ASUSPRO B9440UA-GV0100T
Micron SSD 1100 (MTFDDAV256TBN)
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE
Toshiba THNSF5256GPUK
HP Spectre 13-v131ng
Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP
Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5
Toshiba NVMe THNSN5256GPUK
Toshiba Portege X30-D (PT274U-01N001)
Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
CrystalDiskMark 3.0
-3%
55%
107%
60%
114%
Write 4k QD32
253.6
232.1
-8%
241.2
-5%
416
64%
218.3
-14%
535.7
111%
Read 4k QD32
392.8
247.3
-37%
477.3
22%
497.1
27%
479.2
22%
625.5
59%
Write 4k
90.48
87.8
-3%
128.5
42%
140.2
55%
116.9
29%
143.6
59%
Read 4k
34.85
26.81
-23%
34.63
-1%
57.47
65%
29.31
-16%
40.9
17%
Write 512
228.5
398.8
75%
311
36%
911.3
299%
439.9
93%
762.9
234%
Read 512
385.1
323.2
-16%
971.7
152%
753
96%
1036
169%
857.6
123%
Write Seq
462.3
441.4
-5%
648.2
40%
1088
135%
732.6
58%
1213
162%
Read Seq
508.9
462
-9%
1277
151%
1090
114%
1233
142%
1270
150%
Samsung CM871a MZNTY256HDHP
Sequential Read: 508.9 MB/s
Sequential Write: 462.3 MB/s
512K Read: 385.1 MB/s
512K Write: 228.5 MB/s
4K Read: 34.85 MB/s
4K Write: 90.48 MB/s
4K QD32 Read: 392.8 MB/s
4K QD32 Write: 253.6 MB/s

Graphics

The Fujitsu U937 is not equipped with a dedicated graphics card, but has an Intel HD Graphics 620 integrated into the processor that accesses system RAM as it is not equipped with separate memory. The internal graphics unit is particularly important for decoding current video codecs, but is not so suitable for gaming. Simple games should be playable in low to medium settings, but new and demanding games will not run smoothly, even in the lowest settings.

But these ultra-portable office notebooks are not made for gaming anyway, and the competition has the same integrated graphics unit, although the clock rate varies a little depending on their processors. Only the Toshiba and the HP have a slightly faster processor, so only the clock rate will differ in these devices. 

There are not many differences between the results from the synthetic 3DMark benchmarks: The Fujitsu is only minimally better than the Toshiba in the 3DMark 11 despite its better CPU, but both of them are at the bottom of the list, with the other devices performing about 5% better. 

We ran the benchmarks Cloud Gate and Fire Strike from 3DMark 2013. The former brought very similar results for all comparison devices - there was only about 1% difference between them all, with the exception of the Lenovo and the Toshiba lagging behind by 6 to 14%. In the Fire Strike, on the other hand, the Lenovo was 11% faster than the Fujitsu. As you can see, the results are quite diverse in these tests, but all devices have a similar performance overall. Not even the HP - and definitely not the Toshiba - can really offer better performance, despite being equipped with better CPUs.

Funnily enough, we were not able to start the 3DMark 11 when the Fujitsu was running on battery. After several attempts the benchmark was aborted and showed an error message. Next, we tried starting the Cloud Gate benchmark from 3DMark 2013. This worked, but the throttling in battery mode caused performance to trop to 4077 points, which is almost 50% worse than on power supply. 

3DMark 2013 Cloud Gate
3DMark 2013 Cloud Gate
3DMark 2013 Fire Strike
3DMark 2013 Fire Strike
3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU
HP Spectre 13-v131ng
Intel HD Graphics 620, Intel Core i7-7500U
1562 Points ∼100% +5%
Asus ASUSPRO B9440UA-GV0100T
Intel HD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-7200U
1557 Points ∼100% +5%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE
Intel HD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-7200U
1555 Points ∼100% +5%
Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5
Intel HD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-7200U
1545 Points ∼99% +4%
Fujitsu LifeBook U937
Intel HD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-7200U
1481 Points ∼95%
Toshiba Portege X30-D (PT274U-01N001)
Intel HD Graphics 620, Intel Core i7-7600U
1446 Points ∼93% -2%
3DMark
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE
Intel HD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-7200U
1037 Points ∼100% +11%
Asus ASUSPRO B9440UA-GV0100T
Intel HD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-7200U
975 Points ∼94% +4%
Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5
Intel HD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-7200U
963 Points ∼93% +3%
HP Spectre 13-v131ng
Intel HD Graphics 620, Intel Core i7-7500U
948 Points ∼91% +1%
Fujitsu LifeBook U937
Intel HD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-7200U
935 Points ∼90%
Toshiba Portege X30-D (PT274U-01N001)
Intel HD Graphics 620, Intel Core i7-7600U
847 Points ∼82% -9%
1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics
Asus ASUSPRO B9440UA-GV0100T
Intel HD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-7200U
8433 Points ∼100% +3%
Fujitsu LifeBook U937
Intel HD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-7200U
8191 Points ∼97%
Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5
Intel HD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-7200U
8177 Points ∼97% 0%
HP Spectre 13-v131ng
Intel HD Graphics 620, Intel Core i7-7500U
8104 Points ∼96% -1%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE
Intel HD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-7200U
7725 Points ∼92% -6%
Toshiba Portege X30-D (PT274U-01N001)
Intel HD Graphics 620, Intel Core i7-7600U
7068 Points ∼84% -14%
3DMark 11 Performance
1628 points
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
6277 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
865 points
Help

Gaming Performance

Hardly any new and demanding games can be played smoothly on the Fujitsu U937. "The Witcher 3" and "Rise of the Tomb Raider" both had under 20 fps even with the lowest settings; they are basically unplayable. At the most, these results can be used as a means of comparison to the other devices.

Older or less demanding games such as "Rocket League" can be played in low or even medium settings, although you do have to lower the resolution which is quite noticeable. "Rocket League", for example, can be played at 1280 x 720 pixels and in low details at 54 fps. The game even plays relatively smoothly at about 38 fps in full HD resolution and low details. But even here the game can become unplayable in more demanding scenes or with many players.

Compared to the other devices the Fujitsu has good results: we compared the results of “The Witcher 3” and “Rise of the Tomb Raider” and despite not being good enough to actually play the games, its results were the best of all comparison devices. Sometimes it even overtook the HP Spectre, depending on the set resolution and details. 

You can take a closer look at the Intel HD Graphics 620 and its performance here. We also have a page on various games including detailed information and benchmark results of many games with various graphics cards.

Overall we can say that none of these devices are made with gaming in mind. If you really want to, you can definitely play older or more modest games in low settings. The differences between the various comparison devices is rather small.

low med. high ultra
The Witcher 3 (2015) 13.858.844.77fps
Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) 17.8811.336.14fps
Rocket League (2017) 54.3124.3915.18fps

Emissions

System Noise

noise from cooling fan
noise from cooling fan

All comparison devices seem to have a similar level of system noise according to our measurements. The Fujitsu is a little louder than average while idling, but is comparatively quiet under load. The Dell XPS is the only model that has really good values; it can be considered the quietest device. 

Despite the average-to-good measurements, we were not that happy with the cooling system subjectively. As with all comparison devices, the cooling fans never turn off completely and emit a high-frequency noise even when they are just running along quietly. We noticed this during our test in quiet surroundings and it was particularly annoying under load. But even the quiet Dell has a similar problem.

Noise Level

Idle
30.8 / 30.8 / 31.1 dB(A)
Load
32.3 / 35.7 dB(A)
 
 
 
30 dB
silent
40 dB(A)
audible
50 dB(A)
loud
 
min: dark, med: mid, max: light   Audix TM1, Arta (15 cm distance)   environment noise: 30.8 dB(A)
Fujitsu LifeBook U937
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, Samsung CM871a MZNTY256HDHP
Asus ASUSPRO B9440UA-GV0100T
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, Micron SSD 1100 (MTFDDAV256TBN)
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, Toshiba THNSF5256GPUK
HP Spectre 13-v131ng
HD Graphics 620, 7500U, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP
Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5256GPUK
Toshiba Portege X30-D (PT274U-01N001)
HD Graphics 620, 7600U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
Noise
-0%
0%
-5%
6%
4%
off / environment *
30.8
29
6%
29.6
4%
30.4
1%
28.4
8%
Idle Minimum *
30.8
29
6%
29.6
4%
30.4
1%
28.9
6%
28.4
8%
Idle Average *
30.8
29
6%
29.6
4%
30.4
1%
28.9
6%
28.4
8%
Idle Maximum *
31.1
29
7%
32.2
-4%
30.4
2%
28.9
7%
28.4
9%
Load Average *
32.3
36.7
-14%
34.2
-6%
40
-24%
30.9
4%
33.2
-3%
Load Maximum *
35.7
40.2
-13%
36.1
-1%
40
-12%
33.5
6%
37.9
-6%

* ... smaller is better

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2028.931.229.430.628.92528.129.930.529.928.13127.527.928.529.727.54026.925.528.127.726.95026.22625.62926.26325.625.726.126.825.68024.625.225.426.324.61002423.823.823.32412522.122.622.62322.116021.621.721.621.621.620020.42121.521.220.425019.820.119.119.319.831518.618.618.118.218.640018.618.518.218.118.65001918.717.918.21963019.818.217.417.619.880020.218.817.917.420.2100020.619.31817.620.6125021.720.117.917.721.7160022.620.718.818.322.620002220.619.318.522250023.32120.519.123.3315030.222.119.219.230.2400025.520.319.419.525.5500021.719.919.519.421.7630020.219.419.319.420.2800019.4191919.219.41000018.818.718.618.718.81250018.318.218.118.318.31600017.717.717.617.717.7SPL35.732.131.130.835.7N2.11.61.51.42.1median 20.4Fujitsu LifeBook U937median 19.9median 19median 18.7median 20.4Delta1.61.20.90.81.632.73130.130.931.731.529.629.528.430.529.528.227.727.929.429.627.427.227.429.526.226.525.225.926.726.323.525.124.228.226.224.924.425.126.923.223.422.322.322.822.823.221.221.322.92221.120.319.820.822.520.920.419.52121.419.320.219.220.320.218.518.617.819.819.718.317.917.518.92018.417.917.419.119.718.918.416.519.221.119.718.717.120.620.82018.817.121.223.722.420.81723.923.822.621.216.923.625.724.322.317.425.725.723.922.317.725.426.924.622.218.12726.723.320.31826.424.62219.818.124.322.120.31917.7222019.118.417.319.818.818.417.81718.818.217.817.616.418.11818.218.115.917.836.134.232.529.635.92.31.91.61.22.2median 22Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GEmedian 20.3median 19.8median 17.5median 2122.21.40.92.2hearing rangehide median Fan Noise

Temperature

The Fujitsu reached good results in our temperature measurements: while idling, it heated up the least (together with the Dell) and it remained rather cool even under load, although several comparison devices had similar values. Good: Temperatures are evenly distributed on the top and bottom of the base unit. HP and Dell messed up in this respect with normal to good temperatures on the one side, but very high temperatures on the other, which made them loose several rating points. 

The Fujitsu heats up particularly on the right side towards the screen while the wrist rest remains comfortably cool. The back of the base unit reaches over 40 °C (~104 °F) under maximum load. This is also where the small ventilation slots are through which excess heat can be transported out of the base unit. Compared to the other devices our test unit had the most balanced heat map.

We did a practical test and the device can be used on your lap even under load. We would recommend covering your legs as the heat can become uncomfortable on bare legs. There should be no problems during normal use, however, and the device always remains cool enough to use it wearing shorts in summer.

stress test: Prime95 + FurMark
stress test: Prime95 + FurMark

The CPU reached temperatures of up to 80 °C (~176 °F) during our extreme stress test. When it reaches this temperature, the clock rate is lowered gradually until the CPU remains between 70 and 80 °C (~158 to 176 °F). In our test with Prime95 and FurMark, the CPU clock rate settled between 1.4 and 1.5 GHz. This kind of throttling is normal and the lowered clock rate is still comparatively good. These kinds of stress loads are unlikely to occur in practice for this kind of device. The cooling fans continue running for quite a while after the stress test to slowly cool down the device.

maximum temperatures top
maximum temperatures top
maximum temperatures bottom
maximum temperatures bottom
Max. Load
 43.4 °C41.2 °C35.7 °C 
 34.2 °C37.5 °C30.9 °C 
 26.1 °C26.4 °C26 °C 
Maximum: 43.4 °C
Average: 33.5 °C
34.9 °C41.6 °C40.8 °C
29 °C38.1 °C30.6 °C
27.1 °C27.5 °C27 °C
Maximum: 41.6 °C
Average: 33 °C
Power Supply (max.)  38.9 °C | Room Temperature 22.4 °C | Voltcraft IR-900
Fujitsu LifeBook U937
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, Samsung CM871a MZNTY256HDHP
Asus ASUSPRO B9440UA-GV0100T
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, Micron SSD 1100 (MTFDDAV256TBN)
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, Toshiba THNSF5256GPUK
HP Spectre 13-v131ng
HD Graphics 620, 7500U, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP
Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5256GPUK
Toshiba Portege X30-D (PT274U-01N001)
HD Graphics 620, 7600U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
Heat
-0%
-10%
-8%
-5%
-4%
Maximum Upper Side *
43.4
36.6
16%
48.5
-12%
54.2
-25%
43.4
-0%
40.6
6%
Maximum Bottom *
41.6
41
1%
46.1
-11%
37.7
9%
49.2
-18%
40
4%
Idle Upper Side *
26.5
28
-6%
28.5
-8%
29
-9%
26.4
-0%
30
-13%
Idle Bottom *
26
29
-12%
27.8
-7%
27.6
-6%
26.4
-2%
29.2
-12%

* ... smaller is better

Speakers

1 of 2 speakers to the front of the bottom
1 of 2 speakers to the front of the bottom

Considering the small size of the devices, it is hardly surprising that the speakers cannot cater for a big party and that the quality is not that high. The maximum volume is very limited, there is hardly any bass and even rock music sounds unclear, weak and tinny. We would definitely recommend using headphones or external speakers, which you can connect via USB or the combined audio jack.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2030.630.82529.932.53129.730.14027.730.3502931.96326.828.18026.329.310023.3281252329.316021.629.120021.230.225019.333.331518.235.640018.138.650018.24763017.651.580017.456.7100017.662.1125017.763.1160018.363.9200018.562.6250019.166.5315019.270400019.573.6500019.475.8630019.472.7800019.270.41000018.773.31250018.370.11600017.770.5SPL30.882N1.444.2median 18.7Fujitsu LifeBook U937median 62.6Delta0.815.53437.440.542.535.435.439.444.445.450.93338.229.93635.344.834.248.525.951.928.856.630.159.129.559.325.558.727.162.821.26520.266.319.765.919.662.819.164.619.363.92069.321.46822.467.725.668.420.866.120.657.122.256.925.355.824.451.834.8782.442.8median 22.4Asus ASUSPRO B9440UA-GV0100Tmedian 62.83.45hearing rangehide median Pink Noise
Fujitsu LifeBook U937 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 31.6% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (3.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | reduced mids - on average 7.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 9.2% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(-) | overall sound is not linear (32.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 89% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 5% worse
» The best had a delta of 9%, average was 20%, worst was 47%
Compared to all devices tested
» 91% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 5% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Asus ASUSPRO B9440UA-GV0100T audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (78 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 9.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.3% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (13.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 9% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 83% worse
» The best had a delta of 11%, average was 21%, worst was 48%
Compared to all devices tested
» 12% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 85% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Frequency diagram in comparison (checkboxes can be turned on/off!)

Energy Management

Power Consumption

Once again, our test unit proves how well-balanced it is: There are several rivals that consume more, both while idling and under load. Overall, the Fujitsu remains in the center field without any exceptions. While the Toshiba consumes less power under load, it requires more without load. Only the Dell can be considered more energy-efficient overall.

The narrow 65-watt power supply provides more than enough power and should manage to charge the subnotebook reliably even under maximum load.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.16 / 0.41 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 3.11 / 6.1 / 6.75 Watt
Load midlight 28.9 / 33.3 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Fujitsu LifeBook U937
7200U, HD Graphics 620, Samsung CM871a MZNTY256HDHP, IPS, 1920x1080, 13.3
Asus ASUSPRO B9440UA-GV0100T
7200U, HD Graphics 620, Micron SSD 1100 (MTFDDAV256TBN), IPS, 1920x1080, 14
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE
7200U, HD Graphics 620, Toshiba THNSF5256GPUK, IPS, 1920x1080, 14
HP Spectre 13-v131ng
7500U, HD Graphics 620, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP, IPS UWVA, 1920x1080, 13.3
Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5
7200U, HD Graphics 620, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5256GPUK, IPS, 1920x1080, 13.3
Toshiba Portege X30-D (PT274U-01N001)
7600U, HD Graphics 620, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP, IPS, 1920x1080, 13.3
Power Consumption
-5%
-22%
-16%
12%
-12%
Idle Minimum *
3.11
3.1
-0%
3.8
-22%
3.6
-16%
4.1
-32%
4.6
-48%
Idle Average *
6.1
6.1
-0%
7.1
-16%
6.4
-5%
4.2
31%
7.6
-25%
Idle Maximum *
6.75
6.8
-1%
8.3
-23%
9.2
-36%
5.1
24%
8.2
-21%
Load Average *
28.9
27.4
5%
34.2
-18%
34
-18%
22.1
24%
23.8
18%
Load Maximum *
33.3
43.7
-31%
43.3
-30%
34.4
-3%
29.4
12%
28
16%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Runtime

To measure maximum battery runtime, we took advantage of Fujitsu's own power-saving tools. For example, we limited CPU performance (low) and activated the Fujitsu energy-saving mode. We set the screen to minimum brightness and put the device under minimum load with the BatteryEater Readers test. With these settings, the slim business partner kept running for 19 hours and 12 minutes, which is a very good result similar to that of the AsusPro and which can only be topped by the Dell.

We used the BatteryEater Classic at maximum performance and brightness plus active Wi-Fi and Bluetooth to measure the other extreme - minimum battery runtime. The device turned off after about 2 hours and 40 minutes. This is a good result and puts it on first place. 

After taking a look at these extremes, we turned to the more realistic Wi-Fi test. In this test we measure the average battery runtime while surfing on the internet in the "balanced" mode and at about 150 cd/m2 brightness. Again we made use of Fujitsu's own power-saving tools. When we limited CPU performance to medium and activated the Fujitsu energy-saving mode the device ran for almost 11 hours, another great result that only the Dell can compete with.

More good news: The battery charges quickly and reaches 100% after just one hour.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
19h 12min
WiFi Surfing v1.3
10h 54min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
11h 54min
Load (maximum brightness)
2h 41min
Fujitsu LifeBook U937
7200U, HD Graphics 620, 50 Wh
Asus ASUSPRO B9440UA-GV0100T
7200U, HD Graphics 620, 48 Wh
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2017-20HR0021GE
7200U, HD Graphics 620, 57 Wh
HP Spectre 13-v131ng
7500U, HD Graphics 620, 38 Wh
Dell XPS 13 9360 FHD i5
7200U, HD Graphics 620, 60 Wh
Toshiba Portege X30-D (PT274U-01N001)
7600U, HD Graphics 620, 48 Wh
Battery Runtime
-14%
-22%
-45%
5%
-27%
Reader / Idle
1152
1137
-1%
819
-29%
718
-38%
1295
12%
898
-22%
H.264
714
573
-20%
367
-49%
WiFi v1.3
654
531
-19%
547
-16%
394
-40%
677
4%
430
-34%
Load
161
126
-22%
122
-24%
77
-52%
157
-2%
121
-25%

Verdict

Pros

+ very small and light (950 g!)
+ smart card, fingerprint sensor and TPM 2.0
+ easy maintenance
+ color space coverage
+ battery runtimes
+ screen brightness
+ Anytime USB Charge and Power Delivery

Cons

- touchpad
- high-frequency noise from cooling fan
- average brightness distribution
- SATA III instead of PCIe
- no keyboard backlighting
- display cover not very robust
- no accessories
Review: Fujitsu LifeBook U937. Test unit provided by Fujitsu
Review: Fujitsu LifeBook U937. Test unit provided by Fujitsu

We liked the Fujitsu LifeBook U937. Apart from the meagre touchpad and missing keyboard backlighting, the few points of criticism we have are just minor things that do not have a big impact on overall performance; the small business companion has no real weaknesses.

Yes, the display could have better brightness distribution and the noise from the cooling fan might bother sensitive users. But the SATA III SSD can also be swapped for a PCIe version and the small cooling fans sound just the same in most comparison devices.

On the other hand, there are a lot of positive aspects of this device: first of all, the incredibly light weight of 950 g (~2.1 lb) and its compact size. It also has a lot of security features and very good battery runtime. Another bonus is that it is easy to repair and expand. The device is especially suitable as a company notebook (smart card), but could also please private users.

For just under $1500, you will get a very small and probably the lightest business notebook with a lot of security features, a good battery runtime and a bright display. We would definitely recommend the U937. It only has a few minor weaknesses and performs brilliantly in many respects.

Fujitsu LifeBook U937 - 08/02/2017 v6
Christian Hintze

Chassis
91 /  98 → 92%
Keyboard
82%
Pointing Device
81%
Connectivity
61 / 80 → 76%
Weight
76 / 78 → 95%
Battery
93%
Display
88%
Games Performance
51 / 68 → 74%
Application Performance
87 / 87 → 100%
Temperature
92 / 91 → 100%
Noise
85%
Audio
62 / 91 → 68%
Camera
35 / 85 → 42%
Average
76%
88%
Subnotebook - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 7 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Fujitsu LifeBook U937 (Core i5, Full-HD) Laptop Review
Christian Hintze, 2017-08- 4 (Update: 2017-08- 5)