Author Topic: Cheap Bluepill, very likely it has fake STM32 right ?  (Read 27354 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline GeorgeOfTheJungle

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • !
  • Posts: 2704
  • Country: tr
Re: Cheap Bluepill, very likely it has fake STM32 right ?
« Reply #125 on: February 02, 2020, 08:00:42 pm »
Does anybody know the figures in the silicon art?

That's what engineerds do!
The further a society drifts from truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.
 

Offline techman-001

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 675
  • Country: au
  • Electronics technician for the last 47 years
    • Mecrisp Stellaris Unofficial UserDoc
Re: Cheap Bluepill, very likely it has fake STM32 right ?
« Reply #126 on: February 02, 2020, 09:20:22 pm »
I'm done with F103's - Chance of fake is to big.

I'll be buying F401/f411 boards ... Until they fake those too.  :scared:

/Bingo

I bought in some Chinese irfp240/9240 transistors because they were slightly cheaper.
They lasted 10 minutes until a spike on the mains blew them up.
I replaced them with parts from a "reputable" uk dealer and still going over a year on.
While these copy parts are often functional you dont know what corners have been cut.
I opened one up and the die is about half the size of the genuine part.

The moral of the story is pay a little more and get genuine parts and their will be much less heartache.
I now just use Farnell and RS Components in the UK and not had any problems.


While viewing the outstandingly clear decapping PR0N pics at https://zeptobars.com/en/ the author comments noted that many of the clones (and there are a LOT) whilst quite nicely designed, seemed to view silicon die area reduction as a priority.

In other words, many of the 'clone' dies are a lot smaller than the genuine articles so in the case of your irfp240 clones this reduction in die size probably didn't bode well when dealing with hundreds of volts ?

stm32fxx-diagnostics-v1.5.bin  https://sourceforge.net/projects/mecrisp-stellaris-folkdoc/files/stm32fxx-diagnostics-v1.5.bin
Forth for Cortex-M: https://mecrisp-stellaris-folkdoc.sourceforge.io/
IRC: freenode.net #mecrisp nick tp usually on UTC: 2000 - 1200
 

Offline OwO

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1232
  • Country: cn
  • RF Engineer @ OwOComm. Discord: スメグマ#2236
Re: Cheap Bluepill, very likely it has fake STM32 right ?
« Reply #127 on: February 03, 2020, 05:08:53 am »
Die size reduction on the GD32 is because of using a newer process. The fake transistors you got are most likely relabeled crap and not a proper "clone". If you go the effort of actually designing a clone ASIC there is no reason to skimp on reliability because it doesn't cost more to design it properly.
Discord: スメグマ#2236
Email: OwOwOwOwO123@outlook.com
GitHub: gabriel-tenma-white
 
The following users thanked this post: thm_w

Offline GromBeestje

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 162
  • Country: nl
  • AndrevS @ IRC
Re: Cheap Bluepill, very likely it has fake STM32 right ?
« Reply #128 on: February 09, 2020, 08:37:50 pm »
I've been playing around with the STM32F103 GD32F103 CS32F103 and APM32F103. I've written some code that can tell them apart. I use the content of the ROM TABLE to tell them apart. There is no fancy user interface, it puts its result in the USB string of the Interface.

The USB ID is DEAD:BEEF, so to capture the output, you can do something like this
Code: [Select]
[andre@8570w ~]$ lsusb -d dead:beef -v | grep iInterface
can't get device qualifier: Resource temporarily unavailable
can't get debug descriptor: Resource temporarily unavailable
      iInterface              4 STM32 Cortex-M3 r1p1  V:1 CONT:  0 ID: 32 PART: 410 REV:  0

The iInterface string will contain
  • STM32/GD32/CS32/APM32
  • Cortex M3 rnpn : The ARM Core used: STM32 uses r1p1, clones usually r2p1
  • Content of the PID in the ROM TABLE (JP106 Identifier)

I'm curious about those fake STM32F103 chips, what they will output with this little test. I wonder whether they're relabelled CS32/APM32 or something completely different.

Source code: https://github.com/a-v-s/ucdev/tree/32F103Detect/demos/usbd/stm32f1
Details about the ROM TABLE content: https://www.blaatschaap.be/?p=166
 
The following users thanked this post: thm_w, Jul8

Offline techman-001

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 675
  • Country: au
  • Electronics technician for the last 47 years
    • Mecrisp Stellaris Unofficial UserDoc
Re: Cheap Bluepill, very likely it has fake STM32 right ?
« Reply #129 on: February 10, 2020, 12:18:39 am »
I've been playing around with the STM32F103 GD32F103 CS32F103 and APM32F103. I've written some code that can tell them apart. I use the content of the ROM TABLE to tell them apart. There is no fancy user interface, it puts its result in the USB string of the Interface.

The USB ID is DEAD:BEEF, so to capture the output, you can do something like this
Code: [Select]
[andre@8570w ~]$ lsusb -d dead:beef -v | grep iInterface
can't get device qualifier: Resource temporarily unavailable
can't get debug descriptor: Resource temporarily unavailable
      iInterface              4 STM32 Cortex-M3 r1p1  V:1 CONT:  0 ID: 32 PART: 410 REV:  0

The iInterface string will contain
  • STM32/GD32/CS32/APM32
  • Cortex M3 rnpn : The ARM Core used: STM32 uses r1p1, clones usually r2p1
  • Content of the PID in the ROM TABLE (JP106 Identifier)

I'm curious about those fake STM32F103 chips, what they will output with this little test. I wonder whether they're relabelled CS32/APM32 or something completely different.

Source code: https://github.com/a-v-s/ucdev/tree/32F103Detect/demos/usbd/stm32f1
Details about the ROM TABLE content: https://www.blaatschaap.be/?p=166

I'm curious also and is where I am so far on V2 of my STM32F103 diagnostics. It now prints a short summary, with some observations, and a optional XML table with just the data as collected.

The "DUID" is the Derived Unique Identifier to be used a as filename for any XML files for records, stats and further analysis.

Sample output from my genuine STM32F103C8:

Device Short Summary
--------------------
duid: $D43BA754
Flash bytes, declared: 65536
Debug_idcode: Not readable, candidates:STM32F1x
scb_cpuid: STM32F1 series
udid[95:64] $87042957 |..)W|
udid[63:32] $55507150 |UPqP|
udid[31:00] $066FFF53 |.o.S|


<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<DEVICE xs:noNamespaceSchemaLocation='STM32F103_DIAGNOSTICS_V2.0.XSD'>
 <DEBUG>
   <IDCODE>0 </IDCODE>
 </DEBUG>
 <DERIVED>
   <DUID>$D43BA754 </DUID>
   <FLASH-SIZE>65536 </FLASH-SIZE>
 </DERIVED>
 <EXTERNAL-MARKINGS>
   <STM32F103C6>0 </STM32F103C6>
   <STM32F103C8>0 </STM32F103C8>
   <STM32F103CB>0 </STM32F103CB>
   <CKS32F103C8T6>0 </CKS32F103C8T6>
   <GD32F103C8T6>0 </GD32F103C8T6>
   <OTHER>0 </OTHER>
 </EXTERNAL-MARKINGS>
 <FLASH>
   <SIZE-REGISTER>$FFFF0040 </SIZE-REGISTER>
   <SECOND-64KB-BLOCK>0 </SECOND-64KB-BLOCK>
 </FLASH>
 <SCB_CPUID>
   <BITS-31:24>$41</BITS-31:24>
   <BITS-23:20>$1 </BITS-23:20>
   <BITS-19:16>$F </BITS-19:16>
   <BITS-15:4>$C23 </BITS-15:4>
   <BITS-3:0>$1 </BITS-3:0>
 </SCB_CPUID>
 <UNIQUE-DEVICE-ID-REGISTER>
   <BITS-95:64>
     <HEX>$87042957 </HEX>
     <ASCII>..)W</ASCII>
   </BITS-95:64>
     <BITS-63:32>
     <HEX>$55507150 </HEX>
     <ASCII>UPqP</ASCII>
   </BITS-63:32>
   <BITS-31:0>
     <HEX>$066FFF53 </HEX>
     <ASCII>.o.S</ASCII>
   </BITS-31:0>
 </UNIQUE-DEVICE-ID-REGISTER>
</DEVICE>
stm32fxx-diagnostics-v1.5.bin  https://sourceforge.net/projects/mecrisp-stellaris-folkdoc/files/stm32fxx-diagnostics-v1.5.bin
Forth for Cortex-M: https://mecrisp-stellaris-folkdoc.sourceforge.io/
IRC: freenode.net #mecrisp nick tp usually on UTC: 2000 - 1200
 

Offline techman-001

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 675
  • Country: au
  • Electronics technician for the last 47 years
    • Mecrisp Stellaris Unofficial UserDoc
Re: Cheap Bluepill, very likely it has fake STM32 right ?
« Reply #130 on: February 10, 2020, 11:16:42 am »
I've been playing around with the STM32F103 GD32F103 CS32F103 and APM32F103. I've written some code that can tell them apart. I use the content of the ROM TABLE to tell them apart. There is no fancy user interface, it puts its result in the USB string of the Interface.

The USB ID is DEAD:BEEF, so to capture the output, you can do something like this
Code: [Select]
[andre@8570w ~]$ lsusb -d dead:beef -v | grep iInterface
can't get device qualifier: Resource temporarily unavailable
can't get debug descriptor: Resource temporarily unavailable
      iInterface              4 STM32 Cortex-M3 r1p1  V:1 CONT:  0 ID: 32 PART: 410 REV:  0

The iInterface string will contain
  • STM32/GD32/CS32/APM32
  • Cortex M3 rnpn : The ARM Core used: STM32 uses r1p1, clones usually r2p1
  • Content of the PID in the ROM TABLE (JP106 Identifier)

I'm curious about those fake STM32F103 chips, what they will output with this little test. I wonder whether they're relabelled CS32/APM32 or something completely different.

Source code: https://github.com/a-v-s/ucdev/tree/32F103Detect/demos/usbd/stm32f1
Details about the ROM TABLE content: https://www.blaatschaap.be/?p=166

"There is no fancy user interface, it puts its result in the USB string of the Interface."

That's a bit low rent, aren't we paying you enough ;-)

"Interface              4 STM32 Cortex-M3 r1p1  V:1 CONT:  0 ID: 32 PART: 410 REV: "

That has to be the easiest way to get data out with C, short of using Morse Code via a User LED  :-+

According to my doc and chips, PART: 0x411 is also valid "0x411FC231 (STM32F1 series)" and is what I get with my STM32F103C8's with the hidden extra 64kB Flash

stm32fxx-diagnostics-v1.5.bin  https://sourceforge.net/projects/mecrisp-stellaris-folkdoc/files/stm32fxx-diagnostics-v1.5.bin
Forth for Cortex-M: https://mecrisp-stellaris-folkdoc.sourceforge.io/
IRC: freenode.net #mecrisp nick tp usually on UTC: 2000 - 1200
 

Offline Jul8

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 3
  • Country: de
Re: Cheap Bluepill, very likely it has fake STM32 right ?
« Reply #131 on: February 14, 2020, 12:23:01 pm »
I've been playing around with the STM32F103 GD32F103 CS32F103 and APM32F103. I've written some code that can tell them apart. I use the content of the ROM TABLE to tell them apart.
Thanks! I would like to include your code (stm_romtable() an dependents) into a project of mine. What license does your code have? libhalglue is MIT, but ucdev doesn't tell.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2020, 10:57:59 pm by Jul8 »
 

Offline GromBeestje

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 162
  • Country: nl
  • AndrevS @ IRC
Re: Cheap Bluepill, very likely it has fake STM32 right ?
« Reply #132 on: February 14, 2020, 05:21:06 pm »
ucdev is a container project with a number of submodules containing external repos.

As the code in that branch is a testing / proof of content, I haven't labeled it yet, but that code will be MIT was well.
 
The following users thanked this post: Jul8

Offline GromBeestje

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 162
  • Country: nl
  • AndrevS @ IRC
Re: Cheap Bluepill, very likely it has fake STM32 right ?
« Reply #133 on: February 23, 2020, 02:59:17 pm »
I've been playing around with the STM32F103 GD32F103 CS32F103 and APM32F103. I've written some code that can tell them apart. I use the content of the ROM TABLE to tell them apart.
Thanks! I would like to include your code (stm_romtable() an dependents) into a project of mine. What license does your code have? libhalglue is MIT, but ucdev doesn't tell.

The ROMTABLE parser is now part of libhalglue ( https://github.com/a-v-s/libhalglue/blob/master/common/arm_cpuid.c )
And the demos in ucdev have been updated to include a license header.
 

Offline Noopy

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 608
  • Country: de
    • Richis-Lab
Re: Cheap Bluepill, very likely it has fake STM32 right ?
« Reply #134 on: February 29, 2020, 10:57:34 pm »
Send it to noopy  :)

or zeptobars https://zeptobars.com/en/ , or electronupdate https://www.youtube.com/user/electronupdate/videos?disable_polymer=1

Got one!  ;D

https://www.richis-lab.de/STM32.htm

Now a genuine one would be interesting to see...

Both boards, the Bluepill at 1st post that with the fake STM32F (with "F" at 1st line instead of 2nd), and the ST-Link V2 that has CKS32F103C8T6 are on their way to Noopy.  :P


Got them and took some pictures.


I have reworked my STM32-page to outline what I already have done:

https://richis-lab.de/STM32.htm



First the CKS32:

https://richis-lab.de/STM32_03.htm










And the Bluepill-STM32:

https://richis-lab.de/STM32_04.htm





This one was interesting. It´s not a fake like this one: https://richis-lab.de/STM32_01.htm
But it´s also no STM32, it´s a relabeled CKS32:






Interesting!  :-/O
 
The following users thanked this post: BravoV, thm_w, imo, techman-001, I wanted a rude username

Online BravoV

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7338
  • Country: 00
  • +++ ATH1
Re: Cheap Bluepill, very likely it has fake STM32 right ?
« Reply #135 on: March 01, 2020, 08:26:38 am »
This one was interesting. It´s not a fake like this one: https://richis-lab.de/STM32_01.htm
But it´s also no STM32, it´s a relabeled CKS32:

Thanks Noopy, really appreciate your works there.  :clap:

I guess this is it, all those 2 dollars BluePill boards and 2 dollars STMLink V2 use this CKS32.

Especially the one at the STLink V2, which they clearly labelled CKS, not as STM32, looks like they're pretty confident of their CKS32, aren't they ? (CKS chip designer)

Offline Noopy

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 608
  • Country: de
    • Richis-Lab
Re: Cheap Bluepill, very likely it has fake STM32 right ?
« Reply #136 on: March 01, 2020, 08:42:58 am »
I like opening chips!  :-/O ;D

Money makes the world go round. As Long as the CKS32 is cheaper manufaturer will place them on their boards.
And with the correct label it´s perfectly legal.
With some awareness and enough quality the (cheap) "CKS" could even be a sales argument.

Offline techman-001

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 675
  • Country: au
  • Electronics technician for the last 47 years
    • Mecrisp Stellaris Unofficial UserDoc
Re: Cheap Bluepill, very likely it has fake STM32 right ?
« Reply #137 on: March 01, 2020, 11:36:22 am »
I like opening chips!  :-/O ;D

Money makes the world go round. As Long as the CKS32 is cheaper manufaturer will place them on their boards.
And with the correct label it´s perfectly legal.
With some awareness and enough quality the (cheap) "CKS" could even be a sales argument.

Excellent work, I love your pics.

It looks like the CKS CS32F was sanded down in the second picture then the external markings printed.  I bet the depth of the circular indent is less in the fake STM32F103 as a result of the grinding ?

With the assistance of your work, and my diagnostics feedback it's becoming more obvious to me what the fakers are doing now.

I think the CS32F103 will never be legal, for instance no one seems to know where it comes from. The CKS website doesn't even list the part ... is it even made by CKS ?

There is no User Manual or Tech Manual for the CS32F103 either, and some people have had issues with certain peripherals that won't run code that works on the STM32F103.

I doubt any cost saving is worth it given the lack of a comprehensive data sheet listing the differences between the CS32F103 and the STM32F103 ?

I think it's only any good to scam Blue Pill buyers and pass an initial quick test. The chip is so complex that hobbyists who buy them and can't get a project to work (due to a CS32 difference) probably just think it's their lack of experience. Most wouldn't know the chip is a fake, so your pictures help here as well.

stm32fxx-diagnostics-v1.5.bin  https://sourceforge.net/projects/mecrisp-stellaris-folkdoc/files/stm32fxx-diagnostics-v1.5.bin
Forth for Cortex-M: https://mecrisp-stellaris-folkdoc.sourceforge.io/
IRC: freenode.net #mecrisp nick tp usually on UTC: 2000 - 1200
 

Offline Noopy

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 608
  • Country: de
    • Richis-Lab
Re: Cheap Bluepill, very likely it has fake STM32 right ?
« Reply #138 on: March 01, 2020, 11:47:55 am »
Excellent work, I love your pics.

Thanks!

If anyone has an other "strange looking" STM32 I can do more investigations.


Well I´m no expert regarding these STM32-clones.
I wondered why it was labeled CKS32. A lot of websites talk about "CS32*" and the die marking shows also CS32...

Online BravoV

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7338
  • Country: 00
  • +++ ATH1
Re: Cheap Bluepill, very likely it has fake STM32 right ?
« Reply #139 on: March 01, 2020, 12:05:53 pm »
... some people have had issues with certain peripherals that won't run code that works on the STM32F103.

Have you track on what kind of specific code is that ?

Offline techman-001

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 675
  • Country: au
  • Electronics technician for the last 47 years
    • Mecrisp Stellaris Unofficial UserDoc
Re: Cheap Bluepill, very likely it has fake STM32 right ?
« Reply #140 on: March 01, 2020, 12:20:12 pm »
... some people have had issues with certain peripherals that won't run code that works on the STM32F103.

Have you track on what kind of specific code is that ?

No, that would be a massive task, plus I don't use the clones myself. I don't even use the STM32F103, preferring Cortex-M0 for what I do.

The pic is from somewhere on https://www.stm32duino.com

[attachimg=1]
stm32fxx-diagnostics-v1.5.bin  https://sourceforge.net/projects/mecrisp-stellaris-folkdoc/files/stm32fxx-diagnostics-v1.5.bin
Forth for Cortex-M: https://mecrisp-stellaris-folkdoc.sourceforge.io/
IRC: freenode.net #mecrisp nick tp usually on UTC: 2000 - 1200
 

Offline techman-001

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 675
  • Country: au
  • Electronics technician for the last 47 years
    • Mecrisp Stellaris Unofficial UserDoc
Re: Cheap Bluepill, very likely it has fake STM32 right ?
« Reply #141 on: March 01, 2020, 12:29:33 pm »
Excellent work, I love your pics.

Thanks!

If anyone has an other "strange looking" STM32 I can do more investigations.


Well I´m no expert regarding these STM32-clones.
I wondered why it was labeled CKS32. A lot of websites talk about "CS32*" and the die marking shows also CS32...

Everyone wonders about that, but here in the West, no one seems to know what's going on.

I think the bottom line is "don't waste your time with fakes". I'm sure it's better to pay $10 for a STM32F779AIY6TR  with comprehensive and accurate documentation, 97 Peripherals , 2 MB flash and 500kB ram that runs up to 216Mhz than waste months on a fake 16 year old STM32F103 with zero documentation ?

One can't even get a decent meal for $10 nowadays!
stm32fxx-diagnostics-v1.5.bin  https://sourceforge.net/projects/mecrisp-stellaris-folkdoc/files/stm32fxx-diagnostics-v1.5.bin
Forth for Cortex-M: https://mecrisp-stellaris-folkdoc.sourceforge.io/
IRC: freenode.net #mecrisp nick tp usually on UTC: 2000 - 1200
 

Offline Noopy

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 608
  • Country: de
    • Richis-Lab
Re: Cheap Bluepill, very likely it has fake STM32 right ?
« Reply #142 on: March 01, 2020, 01:10:25 pm »
I think the bottom line is "don't waste your time with fakes". I'm sure it's better to pay $10 for a STM32F779AIY6TR  with comprehensive and accurate documentation, 97 Peripherals , 2 MB flash and 500kB ram that runs up to 216Mhz than waste months on a fake 16 year old STM32F103 with zero documentation ?

One can't even get a decent meal for $10 nowadays!

I fully agree!  :-+

Offline imo

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2654
  • Country: 00
Re: Cheap Bluepill, very likely it has fake STM32 right ?
« Reply #143 on: March 01, 2020, 01:43:47 pm »
CKS32F103 datasheet..
 
The following users thanked this post: GeorgeOfTheJungle

Online SiliconWizard

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5828
  • Country: fr
Re: Cheap Bluepill, very likely it has fake STM32 right ?
« Reply #144 on: March 01, 2020, 02:53:24 pm »
Excellent work, I love your pics.

Thanks!

If anyone has an other "strange looking" STM32 I can do more investigations.


Well I´m no expert regarding these STM32-clones.
I wondered why it was labeled CKS32. A lot of websites talk about "CS32*" and the die marking shows also CS32...

Everyone wonders about that, but here in the West, no one seems to know what's going on.

I think the bottom line is "don't waste your time with fakes". I'm sure it's better to pay $10 for a STM32F779AIY6TR  with comprehensive and accurate documentation, 97 Peripherals , 2 MB flash and 500kB ram that runs up to 216Mhz than waste months on a fake 16 year old STM32F103 with zero documentation ?

One can't even get a decent meal for $10 nowadays!

Oh I really agree with this of course.
But this obsession for low cost, even when low cost doesn't matter, all comes down to how "greedy" we have become IMO. Whereas tracking a cent could of course matter if you're designing cheap products that you'll sell by the million, how could that ever matter, as you said, for hobbyist use? A typical hobbyist may buy a couple dev boards a year. Big deal. You spent more money just talking about it that buying genuine stuff, and it kills "local" business on top of that. And nobody fucking cares.

This attitude is mind-boggling, and I think it's here to stay.
 

Offline OwO

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1232
  • Country: cn
  • RF Engineer @ OwOComm. Discord: スメグマ#2236
Re: Cheap Bluepill, very likely it has fake STM32 right ?
« Reply #145 on: March 01, 2020, 05:46:02 pm »
I would disagree. A MCU is usually just a small part of a complete system, and if all component costs were to double, it would double the cost and thus price of the final product. In a dev board it really doesn't matter, but in a real product it does. If a STM32 costs $5, frequency synthesizers cost $5, op-amps cost $5, RF switches cost $1, then the NanoVNA wouldn't be possible. It would cost $300 and no-one would buy it (maybe a few would but most hobbyists wouldn't afford it). Btw in the V2 design I specifically chose a GD32F303 rather than a STM32F303 (even though it is not a compatible clone), because that dollar of BOM cost reduction really matters. Shave a dollar here and there, and the result is something affordable to any hobbyist and enables you to see things you would have needed a $500 instrument to see before.

"local" is relative. What you call offshore is "local" to me. If I'm designing something and local alternatives offer better bang for buck, of course I'll use that. Telling me to design in genuine STM32 is like me telling you to use some overpriced chinese piece of crap rather than your own local brand that is cheaper and better.
« Last Edit: March 01, 2020, 05:50:23 pm by OwO »
Discord: スメグマ#2236
Email: OwOwOwOwO123@outlook.com
GitHub: gabriel-tenma-white
 
The following users thanked this post: abraxalito, thm_w

Offline GromBeestje

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 162
  • Country: nl
  • AndrevS @ IRC
Re: Cheap Bluepill, very likely it has fake STM32 right ?
« Reply #146 on: March 01, 2020, 07:47:26 pm »
Excellent work, I love your pics.

Thanks!

If anyone has an other "strange looking" STM32 I can do more investigations.


Well I´m no expert regarding these STM32-clones.
I wondered why it was labeled CKS32. A lot of websites talk about "CS32*" and the die marking shows also CS32...

I have some chips here, another "STM32F103 compatible" part the APM32F103. I could send you a sample if you like. Also, I have the cs32f103c8t6 and cs32f103cbt6. I wonder if they are the same as the cks32 labelled part.
 
The following users thanked this post: thm_w

Offline Noopy

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 608
  • Country: de
    • Richis-Lab
Re: Cheap Bluepill, very likely it has fake STM32 right ?
« Reply #147 on: March 01, 2020, 09:10:45 pm »
Excellent work, I love your pics.

Thanks!

If anyone has an other "strange looking" STM32 I can do more investigations.


Well I´m no expert regarding these STM32-clones.
I wondered why it was labeled CKS32. A lot of websites talk about "CS32*" and the die marking shows also CS32...

I have some chips here, another "STM32F103 compatible" part the APM32F103. I could send you a sample if you like. Also, I have the cs32f103c8t6 and cs32f103cbt6. I wonder if they are the same as the cks32 labelled part.

I like!  :)
I´ll write you a PN...


Offline techman-001

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 675
  • Country: au
  • Electronics technician for the last 47 years
    • Mecrisp Stellaris Unofficial UserDoc
Re: Cheap Bluepill, very likely it has fake STM32 right ?
« Reply #148 on: March 01, 2020, 10:47:28 pm »
CKS32F103 datasheet..

Thanks, but this is just the CKS32F103 'electrical' doc, there is no information on the registers and so on.
stm32fxx-diagnostics-v1.5.bin  https://sourceforge.net/projects/mecrisp-stellaris-folkdoc/files/stm32fxx-diagnostics-v1.5.bin
Forth for Cortex-M: https://mecrisp-stellaris-folkdoc.sourceforge.io/
IRC: freenode.net #mecrisp nick tp usually on UTC: 2000 - 1200
 

Offline techman-001

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 675
  • Country: au
  • Electronics technician for the last 47 years
    • Mecrisp Stellaris Unofficial UserDoc
Re: Cheap Bluepill, very likely it has fake STM32 right ?
« Reply #149 on: March 02, 2020, 12:44:04 am »
I would disagree. A MCU is usually just a small part of a complete system, and if all component costs were to double, it would double the cost and thus price of the final product. In a dev board it really doesn't matter, but in a real product it does. If a STM32 costs $5, frequency synthesizers cost $5, op-amps cost $5, RF switches cost $1, then the NanoVNA wouldn't be possible. It would cost $300 and no-one would buy it (maybe a few would but most hobbyists wouldn't afford it). Btw in the V2 design I specifically chose a GD32F303 rather than a STM32F303 (even though it is not a compatible clone), because that dollar of BOM cost reduction really matters. Shave a dollar here and there, and the result is something affordable to any hobbyist and enables you to see things you would have needed a $500 instrument to see before.

"local" is relative. What you call offshore is "local" to me. If I'm designing something and local alternatives offer better bang for buck, of course I'll use that. Telling me to design in genuine STM32 is like me telling you to use some overpriced chinese piece of crap rather than your own local brand that is cheaper and better.

Remember this thread is about fake STM32's which are a plague in the West, illegal by our laws and have caused a massive distrust of Chinese sellers as a result.

Do Chinese vendors consider the short term gains of ripping of their Western buyers in this way a good idea ?

Do they not care that people so affected will probably never buy from China again ?

stm32fxx-diagnostics-v1.5.bin  https://sourceforge.net/projects/mecrisp-stellaris-folkdoc/files/stm32fxx-diagnostics-v1.5.bin
Forth for Cortex-M: https://mecrisp-stellaris-folkdoc.sourceforge.io/
IRC: freenode.net #mecrisp nick tp usually on UTC: 2000 - 1200
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf