Every year, tech reviewers position the latest chip as much better than the old one, and the same thing happens next year, and the next. The Snapdragon 8 Elite was better than the Gen 3, which was better than the Gen 2, and so on.
If the “flagship” chips are so good, why not just stop to save cost? Why upgrade the chipset every year with minimal gains?
If everyone stuck with the same generation of chip, smartphones could be cheaper (good for consumers) OR profit margins could be increased (good for companies). Or maybe a mix of both.
What drives the yearly update in chips? AI maybe?
There was a time when I tried cheap China phones, the newest and best, but from the cheap class. Some where good, some were a desaster.
Now I usually buy phones that have been in fashion 2-4 years before. All good.
Budget phones by Chinese companies are really good now, esp. with things like SiC batteries. Very cheap phones now have nice 120hz screens, decent processors for everyday use, very good battery life, nice build quality, and even okayish cameras. It’s really only the software that’s a bit bloated, but it’s (usually) removable (and you could always install a custom ROM)
Budgets phones from non-Chinese companies like Samsung and now Nothing/CMF are quite good too.
edit: when I mean build quality, I don’t mean metal/glass. Budget phones are made of plastic, but nowadays they have nice finishes, are quite durable, and are dust/water resistant.
except if your government and all available banks practically restrict you from replacing the ROM, because then their apps refuse to work. you often can’t replace gov apps with the web browser because of the closed authentication system, and bank apps either because they routinely block mobile browsers, while the desktop view is unusable for most people