
Ti NE555 – real vs fake: weekend die-shot - BarsMonster
https://zeptobars.com/en/read/Ti-555-NE555-real-vs-face-china-chinese
======
speedplane
This is only half the story. The chips discussed in the article do the basic
function advertised, but may not have the same tolerances as the genuine chip.
But there are other types of counterfeits out there.

When we "recycle" our e-waste, much of it ends up in large landfills in China,
where very poor workers melt down old boards, remove chips, and sort them by
size and pin count. They then use a machine to scrub off the label and print
on a new label of whatever part they want to market (usually obsolete parts
that can't be bought from the original manufacturer). These end up in the
supply chain of even reputable distributors. Amazingly, some of these
counterfeits have made there way into military equipment, and as a result,
there's a whole division of Homeland Security that conducts tests on suspect
computer chip shipments entering the US.

~~~
jfries
Do you mean we end up with a labeled chip whose insides are something
completely different, and so won't ever work? Surely that doesn't happen this
way. It must be many times cheaper to just buy empty packages than to clean up
old ones?

~~~
honestoHeminway
The worst part actually is, when those chips are the correct ones- but have
been used and have all the wear. Means, you have them baked on and off board,
slight overcurrent damages, wear on internal flash and Elektromigration.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromigration](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromigration)

And this chip is integrated into your new device. The only way to avoid this,
would be a standard start of life vault, that is writeable once with the date
and burns of the pathway to to re-write after that.

~~~
anticodon
Please, no. Manufacturers will use this to force selling us new equipment
every 2-3 years. It's a very bad solution.

~~~
honestoHeminway
Manufactureres force you allready to buy new equipment 2-3years, by placing
codensators near heatsources and other nice tricks (including the famous
printer counter).

~~~
raverbashing
"by placing codensators near heatsources"

Oh you mean like every power source is designed today?

There are several _engineering_ reasons to do that, they don't do that to
spite people

And it's called capacitor (in the XXI century at least)

~~~
atom058
In Sweden, we call them "Kondensatorer", i.e using the old form. For me, this
causes quite a lot of jumbled/mixing of words, as my friends and I typically
switch randomly between English and Swedish versions of component names.

~~~
qb45
Also, even in English condenser mics still refuse to become cap mics.

~~~
mikeash
Capacitors in automotive ignition systems are still called "condensers" too,
for some reason.

------
dis-sys
When I was working for a microprocessor company (which you use everyday) many
many years ago, they were selling this JTAG debugger for a few thousand $
each. The cpu architecture was booming in China at that time, but that $
figure is not something people can afford. Clones started to flood the market
pretty fast, a typical clone set you back for a few hundred $, that was
already 1/10 of the original price.

However, that was still considered too expensive - then there was this vendor
in Shanghai which came up a clone they sell for around $100 - after talking to
them via some unofficial channels, we figured out that they had people
stationed in those electronics dump sites to source the chips required. In
those place, you don't pay for each chip, you pay for a kg price, e.g. I want
10kg of that chip, how much each kg please?

10+ years on, those engineers who first studied that CPU architecture back
then using those cloned JTAG debugger are now pretty experienced/better paid,
they are probably the ones complaining fake/reused chips on some Chinese
forums claiming they are the victims.

~~~
pkaye
The problem with faking chips is that the victims maybe out of a warranty
claim later when they find a problem. Also there might be subtle differences
which will only be found when in full production. For a cloned JTAG debugger
the risks are lower since they are used in low volumes. Personally I think
they it is okay to clone or reuse chips but don't claim to be the original
manufacturer. It is quite easy to relabel chip with your own imprint.

~~~
kbaker
I think a bigger problem with the 'chips by the kg' mindset, is that there is
zero incentive and zero funding to develop good software to go along with the
hardware.

Companies who are successful have spent way more time in ensuring that their
software works reliably with their debuggers, across a wide range of chips and
platforms. Sure it's expensive, but everything just works.

By 'stealing' this software in this way, cloning firms are dragging the entire
industry down with the clones that don't work 100%, or the IoT devices that
get infected due to lack of any security. I'm really hoping some certification
body like UL, or major distributor like Amazon or Alibaba, steps in and starts
ensuring at least a basic level of quality for hardware and software.

------
jerkstate
When I read this article I wondered, why would they knock them off and then
sell branded goods at the rock bottom generic price? Then I clicked through a
few more articles and it seems that the answer is so an integrator can "cost-
optimize" your board and profit the difference between genuine and fake
components, while you are none the wiser.

------
laydn
In one of our board designs, we were using a well-known manufacturer's 25Mhz
oscillator, to provide a clock to a gigabit Ethernet PHY. When we wanted to
assemble the boards, we could not find this oscillator in any official
distributor, so we bought them from a vendor in China, who had some in stock.

When we assembled the boards, none of the boards functioned properly. There
was no Ethernet connectivity, the PHY wasn't working

We contacted the "well known manufacturer" and provided photos of the part and
they confirmed that the oscillator was not theirs. It was a counterfeit part.

The "counterfeit" oscillator actually did provide a clean 25Mhz clock, but the
PHY did not work.

It amazes me there are companies out there that produce counterfeit silicon. I
wonder what's their profit margin?

~~~
Nexxxeh
>The "counterfeit" oscillator actually did provide a clean 25Mhz clock, but
the PHY did not work.

Did you find out why?

------
problems
People buying 7 cent chips off Aliexpress and similar know full well that it
ain't coming from TI and usually isn't labelled as such - it might be called
an NE555 but make no mention of manufacturer and not have one labeled on the
chip itself. Obviously finding a datasheet from a different manufacturer won't
be applicable...

If you're buying those you're most likely using it for an application that
isn't pushing its limits - they're great for experimenting with as a hobbyist
or cranking your design to the lowest price possible if you're not on those
limits.

~~~
kw71
Mouser is selling TI NE555DR for $0.07 in quantity, so I am sure that TI's
actual sale price is lower.

So, I think someone paying $0.07 on aliexpress is paying "full price" for
something less, even if they rationalize they are getting a discount because
they are not buying large lots (Buy only 100 at mouser and the cost goes up to
$0.15, but for instance Arrow has a lower price than that for this quantity)

~~~
Freak_NL
AliExpress has another benefit though; zero to very low shipping costs.

In the EU buying electrical components at a hobbyist scale often means having
to save up your purchases (e.g., €0,24 for the NE555 at Conrad) until you hit
the minimum free shipping limit (in this case €20) or pay the full shipping
(€4,95 in this example) for one little component.

AliExpress just has the better user experience if you are learning and
experimenting (just buy a couple of spares and be prepared to switch to
genuine stuff when needed).

~~~
tzs
I don't understand why these places can't just use regular mail.

I wanted some discrete through-hole MOSFETs for bidirectional level shifting
as described in this application note [1].

The ZVNL110A satisfies all of the requirements [2]. In small quantity they
were $0.604 each at the time from Mouser, and I wanted 10, so $6.04 for the
MOSFETs. And then another $7.99 for freaking shipping. (I ended up ordering
30, figuring maybe I'll eventually need that many, and then I'm "only" paying
50% for shipping instead of >100%).

These things are very small, and only weigh half a gram each. Just take an
ordinary letter envelope, drop them in, put a first class postage stamp on it
($0.49), and mail it. A $0.49 first class stamp allows up to 99 grams, so
orders up to a couple hundred of these could be shipped that way.

For those curious, the size constraints on a first class letter in the US are:

    
    
      3.5" <= height <= 6.125"
      5" <= width <= 11.5"
      0.007" <= thickness <= 0.25"
    

0.25" is 6.35mm. A large number of through-hole components would usually fit,
such as transistors, diodes, resistors, and disc capacitors. Most surface
mount components would fit.

[1] [https://cdn-shop.adafruit.com/datasheets/an97055.pdf](https://cdn-
shop.adafruit.com/datasheets/an97055.pdf)

[2]
[http://www.mouser.com/ds/2/115/ZVNL110A-95598.pdf](http://www.mouser.com/ds/2/115/ZVNL110A-95598.pdf)

~~~
problems
I wonder what the breakdown on the actual shipping vs handling labor costs are
for a big distributor like Mouser or DigiKey.

Compare with labor costs for either factories or small owner operated export
businesses run out of Shenzhen and you can see where there might be a pretty
big difference in the handling price.

~~~
Freak_NL
Labour costs are probably the primary barrier for this, but I can't help but
wonder if a big distributor couldn't make it work; after all, the labour costs
are already factored into the component unit price, not the shipping costs.
For a large, traditional order you get a shipping list, determine the box size
needed, gather the components, pack the box, slap a label on, and place it in
the outgoing mail trolley.

For these small shipments, you would get a shipping list, see that the order
system determined that it would fit in an envelope, grab an envelope, gather
the components (perhaps for ten envelope-orders at a time), place in envelope,
slap a label on, and place it in the outbox for envelopes.

It doesn't seem that much more labour intensive or more expensive in terms of
packaging, and the first distributor in a geographical area to do so might
gain a bunch of customers. Even if the base price of components was increased
by 10% or 20% for envelope orders a lot of us would still use that service.

------
contingencies
Actual title is "Ti NE555 - real vs fake : weekend die-shot".

Current title "Chinese fake microchips hit rock bottom with 7¢ Ti NE555" is
bad IMHO.

~~~
chiph
I dunno. It seems pretty descriptive to me. It identifies the source of the
fakes (China), the product being counterfeited (the venerable 555 Timer), and
the price they're being sold at.

I found this on eBay - 100 pcs of thru-hole 555's for $3.29 (3.2 cents each)
with the TI logo printed on them. They say brand new and unused - but that's
just not possible at that price.

[http://www.ebay.com/itm/100PCS-NE555P-NE555-DIP-8-SINGLE-
BIP...](http://www.ebay.com/itm/100PCS-NE555P-NE555-DIP-8-SINGLE-BIPOLAR-
TIMERS-IC-factory-price/281680016124)

~~~
lightedman
"They say brand new and unused - but that's just not possible at that price."

I just picked up 500 LM555s from RadioShack - 50 cents for the entire batch.

They weren't joking when they said "No Offer Refused" for their closeout.

~~~
chiph
You could probably have gotten the stand they were displayed on for only
another $5.

I remember the Circuit City liquidation - the prices were insane. But it was
also sort of sad.

------
microcolonel
I recognize that chip at the bottom of the article! That's a Hitachi HA17555,
which was on Zeptobars just a few months ago[0].

[0]: [https://zeptobars.com/en/read/Hitachi-
HA17555-555-timer](https://zeptobars.com/en/read/Hitachi-HA17555-555-timer)

~~~
kw71
Interesting I wonder what the history of this design is? And how Hitachi's (or
their partner's) die really wound up being re-marked as TI? If the die is a
Chinese produced copy, why did they keep the markings during retooling?

I wish photographs of the packages were presented also.

Edit: The other "not genuine" die has quite a few similarities and it looks
like one inspired the other.

~~~
simcop2387
If it's copied, they likely copied it entirely because trying to remove bits
of the lithography mask is expensive and time consuming. Since it's not
normally scene there's no use in spending the time or money to change it if
you can get the mask.

------
greglindahl
At the start of the ROHS era my startup was scrambling to get parts, and we
bought some grey-market capacitors. Which turned out to be fakes. What a mess.
It's all about the supply chain!

~~~
wyager
I'm a huge fan of the knock-off chips that are just a piece of copper
connecting all the pins. I wonder why they bother with the copper, instead of
just using a block of plastic.

~~~
jotux
I worked for a _huge_ company with their own manufacturing in China. We did a
beta run of a product and they used some black market components for a TI
regulator. When we got the boards the output was dead on the regulator so we
sent it to TI. They x-rayed the part and it was just an empty plastic package.

~~~
pitaa
Did you have a pretty good idea that this was the case before sending them to
TI? Hardware design fascinates me and I'm just curious how something like this
goes down.

~~~
jotux
We actually thought it was a problem with TI's parts, which is why we sent it
to TI (we had a dedicated TI rep that came by every 2-3 weeks). When it came
back that the package was empty it was actually a little embarrassing for us,
since everyone immediately knew they were fakes. A bunch of calls went out and
eventually one of the manufacturing managers tracked down the purchasing guy
in the factory that said something like, "Oh this was a small run and I didn't
want to buy a whole reel so I just ran down to the corner electronics market
and picked up a 100."

------
raverbashing
The 555 is probably simple enough so that the "fake" version (which several
times is just an alternative version from a different manufacturer) works as
well as the original one

~~~
ajnin
They probably work but probably not within the same maximum/minimum ratings as
the original chip. Your design might need a max frequency, or a minimum
operating voltage, or a certain current-driving capability etc. that the fake
chip cannot provide, causing the final product to fail when the design
prototype worked fine. There are many variants of the 555 with wildly varying
characteristics, not all are interchangeable.

------
ksk
What are your thoughts on people not respecting Intellectual Property rights?
Will it lead us down a path of gridlock where nobody is going to create
anything new for fear of someone else using their work without payment/credit?
Also, why is using someones creative output or deriving from it OK in some
fields (like applied sciences) but not in others? (Here I'm not including the
people who claim others' work as their own, merely people who clone)

------
nfriedly
I bet there could be an actual business model of recycling components from
e-waste. Obviously it'd require more QA work than what the counterfeit
"recyclers" do, but, with enough automation, I bet you could structure it so
that you at least break even on the e-waste disposal side, and then any resold
components become pure profit.

------
userbinator
_That means our HA17555 was also fake._

Alternatively, it means that "G1083" was actually a remarked HA17555.

The "dotted X" logo on the other one I've seen before, but can't remember the
name.

------
Hasz
Instead of pointing out the die layout, how about a rigorous test? Let's see
clock accuracy, power consumption, etc vs the original TI part.

------
andrewstuart
The layouts look like a rogue/nethack level or maybe some new version of
pacman.

------
jabberwockwock
This is why companies need services like TexPlained.

[http://hardwear.io/olivier-thomas.php](http://hardwear.io/olivier-thomas.php)

------
em3rgent0rdr
Although the author calls these designs "fake", they do perform the same
functionality, but just simply don't meet the voltage tolerance and noise
resistance levels of higher grade designs. So they're more of a "knock-off",
"counterfeit", "imitation", or "derivative".

~~~
xupybd
They are fake because they use the same name. Kinda like fake Nikes are still
shoes but clearly fakes.

~~~
em3rgent0rdr
ok. Sorry I had to look up the definition of fake: "not genuine; counterfeit".
So I guess fake is valid in this case. I was thinking fake meant "not real" or
that it didn't actually do the same functionality.

~~~
greglindahl
"same functionality" includes a LOT more than just the basic functions. It
also includes voltage tolerance, noise resistance, and all of the other things
you dismissed.

~~~
em3rgent0rdr
But still as the author explains "If you're not reaching for the limits (like
max VCC or precision) and have some luck - that might not cause issues." And I
didn't dismiss that...I said "just simply don't meet the voltage tolerance and
noise resistance levels of higher grade designs".

I guess what triggered me to write my first comment was the fact someone
buying a "TI" something chip from eBay when it lists "China" as the seller's
location and with a seller's name other than something easily verified to be
TI, then it seems there is no pretense that the thing being sold is genuine
TI. But the word "fake" holds the connotation that there is some deception
going on. So that is why I don't think fake is the most appropriate word. I
just hear that word used too much to disparage chinese made derivative
imitation products. Someone who knows they don't need the noise levels and
voltages tolerances can be perfectly happy and even benefit by using these
instead of the more expensive genuine TI.

~~~
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC
So, are you saying that if I suspect that I am being defrauded, it's not fraud
anymore?

~~~
em3rgent0rdr
Not suspect. But know.

~~~
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC
So, how do I know (and not just suspect) that a particular seller is not
selling TI parts?

~~~
em3rgent0rdr
Well there is no way to verify that the device was manufactured by TI. That
itself doesn't let you know as a matter of truth, but that does let you as a
smart shopper know that it is likely fake. You can make an inference since (A)
you are buying on a website that is known for providing a means for
counterfeit goods from China, and (B) the seller is located in China and has
no info that reliably identifies it as a seller of genuine parts.

