| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
lither
Joined: 04 Dec 2005
Posts: 1362
Location: Taiwan
|
 Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 5:30 am Post subject: 486 without specification number |
 |
|
here is a 486 i got this week
no prefix
no specification number
just ES-B4
the print on the bottom is weared and difficult to read
edit:image upload to cpu-world
Last edited by lither on Sat Mar 15, 2008 7:27 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
hugo929
Joined: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 6163
Location: China
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JAC
Joined: 24 Jul 2005
Posts: 3469
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 6:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Please post some high resolution scans of the top and bottom ( without image distortion ) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lither
Joined: 04 Dec 2005
Posts: 1362
Location: Taiwan
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hugo929
Joined: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 6163
Location: China
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lither
Joined: 04 Dec 2005
Posts: 1362
Location: Taiwan
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 7:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| hugo929 wrote: | I cant access to onxt.net.  |
hi hugo
i have edited my first post
and upload the image directly to cpu-world |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hugo929
Joined: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 6163
Location: China
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 7:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for the pic.
Datacode is 1989 49, very early
I would say it's an uncommon ES |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JAC
Joined: 24 Jul 2005
Posts: 3469
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 10:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
The back of the chip matches a DX-25 - onyl found on specs SX250 (maybe also SX249, but I dont have one to confirm), and SX308.
There are a couple other strange things..
Why no A prefix?
Why are the markings rubbed off on the bottom? It is very unsual to see the bottom markings rubbed off - I often only see that on cpus that have been remarked.
Why the poor quality top markings? - the white i486 - .. again unsual to see that... and the only time I have seen that is when a strong thermal epoxy type compound was used to secure a heatsink, it also left a mark on the ceramic. The white printing line does not look straight.. is that image taken without distortion? If using a scanner place the chip in the middle of the scanner.
Does anyone know the earliest DX-33 ? Maybe time for another call on the forum to look at our chips. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lither
Joined: 04 Dec 2005
Posts: 1362
Location: Taiwan
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 11:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Why are the markings rubbed off on the bottom? It is very unsual to see the bottom markings rubbed off - I often only see that on cpus that have been remarked.
Why the poor quality top markings? - the white i486 - .. again unsual to see that... and the only time I have seen that is when a strong thermal epoxy type compound was used to secure a heatsink, it also left a mark on the ceramic. The white printing line does not look straight.. is that image taken without distortion? If using a scanner place the chip in the middle of the scanner.
|
good point!
it is me who destroy the print
------------
here is the story
this chip comes with a strange and strong layer on the top
as the picture showed ,
obviously , the preivous owner also try to remove this layer
he use mechanical method and he damage the print partly
when i got this chip
ii use acetone to remove it
my work start from the 486 mark
and after soaking with acetone for about 20 minutes ,i try to remove the layer from the "486 line" i find the layer could be removed by ruberring but as you can see the print "486"damaged
just at the same time , my 1 y/o little son is crying (my wife is out for shopping). i leave this chip to the acetone and when i return to it about half hour later (when my son sleep). i found the glue is almost disolved by the aceton and the "intel ") is perfect preserved
most of the print-loss is compatible with the air bobble area
i think the air bobble lift the print off just by a mechanical method
and the "486" is damaged more ,partly because of the preiovus owner and partly because of inadequate acetone soaking
PS :
i know some Chinese and some Taiwanese collector like to use some glue to form a layer to protect their chips (just as the coca-cola bottle cap collector do )
sadly, this will destory the print if the quality of the glue is not good (just like these air bobbles) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
debs3759
Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 9477
Location: Northampton, Divided Kingdom
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 12:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| JAC wrote: | | Does anyone know the earliest DX-33 ? Maybe time for another call on the forum to look at our chips. |
According to http://users.erols.com/chare/486.htm, the DX25 was first retailed on April 10th 1989 and the DX33 on May 7th 1990. This was released on
B4 is at least the 4th stepping of the 486 core as used for the DX-33. There was A0 and A1 (CPUID or reset ID = 0400). B3 - B6 (some sources say there was a B2, but the manuals don't mention it) are CPUID 0401.
That gives A0, A1 and B3, possibly also B2, that came before B4.
I would suggest that this is too early an example to be the 4th (or 5th) stepping of a processor which was not released until some 5 months after the date on this chip.
Also, I agree with JAC about lack of prefix in the part number. And the print on the bottom seems very difficult to accidentally rub off without at least bending one or more pins, and those pins do not look like they have had as much abuse (damage) as the cap they surround.
The print on the cap I can understand, as the way some chips get treated (including using such a strong glue that probably isn't very heat conductive, looking at those air bubbles - or using it to "protect" a chip, as you mention, although I never heard of that) does cause print to lift off, but that doesn't explain the amount of scratching and loss of print on the underside.
_________________
My graphics card database can be found at http://www.gpuzoo.com.
I can resist anything except temptation.
Debs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cpuswe
Joined: 15 Mar 2005
Posts: 2214
Location: Karlskrona, Sweden
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 12:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I find it odd to dismiss this as an ES just by its prints and that a number has been rubbed of.
1. Why cant the part number miss a "A"? Its an early ES, it could be printed anyway the engineers liked it.
2. "Poor markings/rubbed of markings". Again, its an ES, perhaps not made in the same way/factory as a final product. Different (cheaper) printing technique because its inhouse only?
3. What is the source? Chinese seller on eBay or a source where you previously got ES chips?
4. If it where faked, why havenīt we seen it before? A faker dont make 10 or 100 of the chip...
5. Have we encountered a fake that could withstand that treatment and still hold its markings?
I would say that this is a perfectly "only one known" ES that is destroyed, judged by this thread. Sad...
I know we have to be suspicious around possible fakes but to dismiss a ES chip is a bit harder since it could differ in so many ways from the final product.
_________________
My collection: http://www.cpucollection.se :::::: http://www.chipdb.org Photos of chips you never knew existed. Now over 6000 different chips in the database. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
debs3759
Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 9477
Location: Northampton, Divided Kingdom
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 1:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have no opinion for this one on whether it is genuine or not, I merely gave as complete information as I could to answer the questions posed. All I can say personally is that if the processor ID is 0402 or higher, it is a fake, and if it is 0400 it probably isn't, but if it is 0401 it may or may not be genuine (I don't know dates for when steppings changed, only what stepping goes with what CPUID). CPUID (my method of determine the chances of being genuine, in a case like this) is not a guarantee for older processors (although if it supports CPUID, it is too new to be that early an ES).
In response to your question #4 - for every fake produced, there is always a first example. Whether there are 10 or 10,000, someone has to sell/buy the first one.
That is why I will never say definitively that a chip is genuine or fake without knowing the CPUID or a lot more info.
Don't forget as well that with the number of fakes coming out of China (and I am not accusing anyone here, as I don't know who produces them and who knows when selling that something is fake), it is natural for people to discuss an unknown chip and see what can be determined, before an example is sold for the price some people pay.
EDIT:
Just an afterthought, but the bottom of the chip might not be known for this particular (unknown) sample, but it is right for the datecode that is on the top, adding weight to the chances of it being genuine.
It is also possible that earlier steppings were not all used for production parts, and they may have changed frequently initially to get rid of well documented (online, not by Intel AFAIK) bugs, which means what I said about the B4 could be right - it seems unlikely that it was used 5 months before the release of the chip, but (which I didn't think I needed to add) that doesn't mean it is not possible. Just that there is currently no openly available info to confirm either way.
I would certainly love to have access to this (or one like it) for long enough to do some software testing on it (same goes for earlier examples, I would love to do some testing for ID purposes).
_________________
My graphics card database can be found at http://www.gpuzoo.com.
I can resist anything except temptation.
Debs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
debs3759
Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 9477
Location: Northampton, Divided Kingdom
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 3:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I just found a document I was looking for regarding specs and CPUID for early 486.
Information I have read or seen:
The CPUID for SX308 is 0401.
The chip shown here has the same underside markings as some SX308 and earlier 486DX (but not later chips).
Stepping B4 has CPUID (reset ID) 0401, same as SX308.
The example shown has a datecode that is earlier than the first DX33 was released.
Given all that info, I would now say that there is a good chance that this is a genuine 486DX33 ES. I would also guess that it means some early steppings were only available in early samples.
_________________
My graphics card database can be found at http://www.gpuzoo.com.
I can resist anything except temptation.
Debs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cpuswe
Joined: 15 Mar 2005
Posts: 2214
Location: Karlskrona, Sweden
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 4:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Fake or not, these kind of facts and knowledge that you supply debs, are a great contribution to the community.
Really impressive!
_________________
My collection: http://www.cpucollection.se :::::: http://www.chipdb.org Photos of chips you never knew existed. Now over 6000 different chips in the database. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wizzard1
Joined: 05 Nov 2006
Posts: 930
Location: Boston MA USA
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 6:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| That goop which was on the top of it resembles a silicone compound used to weather/water/dust-proof electronics. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
![[ Hidden ]](https://cdn.cpu-world.com/forum/templates/CPUWorld/images/lang_english/icon_email.gif "[ Hidden ]"){kind=icon}
