IMO, I have mostly seen mislabeling, rebinning, and passing off obvious QC rejects.
example from many years ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6DfBuPwAAA
That's the better method of course (results wise), but it's not nearly as accessible, hence my recent evangelism of the virtues of 2000 grit sandpaper.
You could still compare the internal structure of the package and bonding, but the die itself is mostly destroyed.
https://phillipscorp.com/india/phillipsgrinding/phillips-sur...
All you need is a serial port and some G-codes.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLDlWKv7KIIr9rlCwZ9K43...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pIpxawdUb4I&t=30m18s
…plus it smells much better; and, as you mention, it’s useful for potatoes too!
https://bittersoutherner.com/feature/2022/the-elusive-roots-...
(also I don't recommend a SEM in the first post, a cheapo USB 'microscope' will do, I just happen to have had SEM images on hand)
Discarded things tend to get lost. Lost things tend not stay in the Anduin forever.
I'll have to put that on a warning label near our non-conforming-product containment shelf!
Clones tend to be vastly different - different technology node, architecture, die size, etc. - that's because they are generally functional clones, not mask clones.
(also, as a general shoutout to the low tech sandpaper technique for exploratory work, here's a sanded down RP2350 thrown under a clapped out SEM: https://object.ceph-eu.hswaw.net/q3k-personal/484e7b33dbdbd9... https://object.ceph-eu.hswaw.net/q3k-personal/3290eef9b6b9ad... )