pirozy
11-06-2016, 17:45
Nordic NRF24L01+ - real vs fake : weekend die-shot
Nordic NRF24L01+ (NRF24L01P) is a very popular 2.4Ghz transceiver used in countless consumer products. Not surprising that we've came across it's fake.
Genuine: This chip was extracted from "expensive" (~10$) RF module with additional RF amplifier chip:
You can see links before reply (You can see links before reply)
Die size - 1876x1761 µm, 250nm technology.
Nordic logo on the die:
You can see links before reply (You can see links before reply)
You can see links before reply (You can see links before reply)
Compatible/counterfeit: This chip was extracted from "cheap" RF module (<1$):
You can see links before reply (You can see links before reply)
Die size - 2014x1966 µm, 350nm technology.
Resume:
Chip marking is similar, though not identical (genuine one on the right):
You can see links before reply
Fake chip has quite thin marking. Also, text jumps significantly from chip to chip (point stays in place).
Despite there were no functional differences reported (yet), one could expect that 350nm compatible chip will have slightly higher power consumption and slightly lower sensitivity. If only this chip was marked properly (Like SI24R1 - one of compatible chips) as compatible - that would have been totally legitimate business. But currently designers, manufacturers and end users are mis-leaded.
Nordic NRF24L01+ (NRF24L01P) is a very popular 2.4Ghz transceiver used in countless consumer products. Not surprising that we've came across it's fake.
Genuine: This chip was extracted from "expensive" (~10$) RF module with additional RF amplifier chip:
You can see links before reply (You can see links before reply)
Die size - 1876x1761 µm, 250nm technology.
Nordic logo on the die:
You can see links before reply (You can see links before reply)
You can see links before reply (You can see links before reply)
Compatible/counterfeit: This chip was extracted from "cheap" RF module (<1$):
You can see links before reply (You can see links before reply)
Die size - 2014x1966 µm, 350nm technology.
Resume:
Chip marking is similar, though not identical (genuine one on the right):
You can see links before reply
Fake chip has quite thin marking. Also, text jumps significantly from chip to chip (point stays in place).
Despite there were no functional differences reported (yet), one could expect that 350nm compatible chip will have slightly higher power consumption and slightly lower sensitivity. If only this chip was marked properly (Like SI24R1 - one of compatible chips) as compatible - that would have been totally legitimate business. But currently designers, manufacturers and end users are mis-leaded.