| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Post links of collection fakes here (non active collectors only) |
| Yes |
|
92% |
[ 25 ] |
| No |
|
7% |
[ 2 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 27 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Neon_WA
Joined: 08 Nov 2008
Posts: 7146
Location: Margaret River, West Australia
|
 Posted: Sat Jun 19, 2010 9:10 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Tetrium wrote: | | I just keep looking and it's very hard for me to spot the difference. I can see the font looks a little different, especially the ' in '89 and '92. |
here is a list of errors
1 ) Font bolder (most obvious in the Intel logo where the l joins the e)
2 ) extra space missing between D & X2ODPR66
3 ) the shape of the 2 in DX2OPR..
4 ) Both 0 & O should be narrower
5 ) C should be narrower
6 ) 5 is wrong shape
7 ) S is wrong shape
8 ) the 9 in SZ935 is taller
9 ) spacing of V4.0
10) T & E in Intel are wrong shape
11) the spacing in the '89 '92
there is a few other things... but wont get into them 
as fakes go.. its not a bad one.. least it doesnt look like something that has come out of a kindergarten 
_________________
There are 10 types of people in this world:
those who understand binary and those who don't. ~Author Unknown
http://www.x86-guide.net/Neon-WA/en/collection.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Neon_WA
Joined: 08 Nov 2008
Posts: 7146
Location: Margaret River, West Australia
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 20, 2010 12:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
remarked/fake from not really active collector... and not listed as a fake 
_________________
There are 10 types of people in this world:
those who understand binary and those who don't. ~Author Unknown
http://www.x86-guide.net/Neon-WA/en/collection.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Neon_WA
Joined: 08 Nov 2008
Posts: 7146
Location: Margaret River, West Australia
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2010 7:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
couple of pics of remark/fakes in collections, not noted as such
_________________
There are 10 types of people in this world:
those who understand binary and those who don't. ~Author Unknown
http://www.x86-guide.net/Neon-WA/en/collection.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tetrium
Joined: 25 Apr 2010
Posts: 466
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 11:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Fake?
Edit: The 0's are bigger then the rest of the DX4ODPR line |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Neon_WA
Joined: 08 Nov 2008
Posts: 7146
Location: Margaret River, West Australia
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 6:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tetrium wrote: | Fake?
Edit: The 0's are bigger then the rest of the DX4ODPR line |
looks a bit suss.. can you tell me the markings on the die.. then i can be sure
_________________
There are 10 types of people in this world:
those who understand binary and those who don't. ~Author Unknown
http://www.x86-guide.net/Neon-WA/en/collection.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tetrium
Joined: 25 Apr 2010
Posts: 466
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2010 6:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This is the underside (don't mind the damage)
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Neon_WA
Joined: 08 Nov 2008
Posts: 7146
Location: Margaret River, West Australia
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2010 7:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
well the production date (96/16) the die date (96/05) & test date (week 15) all fit together
so apart from the slightly oversize 0s & slightly bolder text, there isnt anything else out of place. Generally with fakes you can find multiple errors.
Due to variations in genuine chip markings, I personally work on 3 - 4 errors for it to be a possible fake
and once i find 6 i put it in the definite fake category.
The only other issue i have with it (but it maybe just the pic) is the part numbing plate looks painted (doesnt have the look of anodized metal)
so I would have to put it in the OK category mate 
_________________
There are 10 types of people in this world:
those who understand binary and those who don't. ~Author Unknown
http://www.x86-guide.net/Neon-WA/en/collection.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tetrium
Joined: 25 Apr 2010
Posts: 466
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2010 8:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| If it's painted, would I be able to remove it with rubbing alcohol? Or could that destroy a perfectly legit chip? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Neon_WA
Joined: 08 Nov 2008
Posts: 7146
Location: Margaret River, West Australia
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2010 8:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tetrium wrote: | | If it's painted, would I be able to remove it with rubbing alcohol? Or could that destroy a perfectly legit chip? |
long as you keep away from the text... the anodized finish wont be affected
I would just try a corner of the plate.. if the colour comes off.. then it been painted
here is another fake SZ959 i got off Chook (he has more here http://www.cpu-world.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=14297)
The heastsink has been removed on this one.. just to try and look for more info
production date week 02 1995 << not original
Die Date week 26 1995 << original
Test Date week 07 << original
Date on voltage reg week 22 1995 << original
You cant tell in this pic, but the four bottom text lines on the heatsink has been printed using a different ink to the intel overdrive logo
This was a DX4ODP75 with the extra pin cut off and original production date marked would of been around week 06 - 08 1996
_________________
There are 10 types of people in this world:
those who understand binary and those who don't. ~Author Unknown
http://www.x86-guide.net/Neon-WA/en/collection.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Neon_WA
Joined: 08 Nov 2008
Posts: 7146
Location: Margaret River, West Australia
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 25, 2010 3:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
looks like the text panel has been painted & possibly remarked from a 75.. will PM owner
_________________
There are 10 types of people in this world:
those who understand binary and those who don't. ~Author Unknown
http://www.x86-guide.net/Neon-WA/en/collection.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Neon_WA
Joined: 08 Nov 2008
Posts: 7146
Location: Margaret River, West Australia
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
smithy
Joined: 27 Apr 2008
Posts: 2906
Location: Sydney, Australia
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 27, 2010 2:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Here is a fake for sure. Interesting they chose an sspec which doesn't seem to exist (as far as I know) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Neon_WA
Joined: 08 Nov 2008
Posts: 7146
Location: Margaret River, West Australia
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 27, 2010 5:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| smithy wrote: | | Here is a fake for sure. Interesting they chose an sspec which doesn't seem to exist (as far as I know) |
big time fake
most likely a SX418 by the originally die markings or it could of been SX412
_________________
There are 10 types of people in this world:
those who understand binary and those who don't. ~Author Unknown
http://www.x86-guide.net/Neon-WA/en/collection.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chook
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Posts: 2250
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 27, 2010 6:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have one of those SX416 fakes with the same date code engraved - would be from the same faker. Mine has 92055326AA Malay U 212 on the underside. This is one of the few fakes that use the correct (R).
_________________
General failure reading disk in drive A
Who's General Failure and why is he reading my disk? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Neon_WA
Joined: 08 Nov 2008
Posts: 7146
Location: Margaret River, West Australia
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 02, 2010 10:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
these pics are not online, but the owner kindly allowed me to use them
not an easy fake to pick, but this SL5GA 850 Celeron is actually a late production 566.... most likely a SL4PC
_________________
There are 10 types of people in this world:
those who understand binary and those who don't. ~Author Unknown
http://www.x86-guide.net/Neon-WA/en/collection.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
![[ Hidden ]](https://cdn.cpu-world.com/forum/templates/CPUWorld/images/lang_english/icon_email.gif "[ Hidden ]"){kind=icon}
