But a more expensive phone will last you longer until it gets completely outdated because of its’ performance, therefore you replace it less often and generate less e-waste.

I know that person said Apple (6-7 years of software updates!) is out of the question, but nearly all higher-end Androids get good custom ROM support and can be kept running for years after the OEM stops supporting it.

For just under $200 (in my country anyway - we have 20% sales tax, you might get something better in the US for the same money) I can get a Galaxy A14 with a Mediatek MT6769, a SoC built on an ancient 12nm node, which might be cheap, but will have much less performance per watt than a 7 or 8 series Snapdragon on a 4nm node.

I’ve had several phones under $200 over the years. One thing’s been common. The stuff that sucks is the stuff that’s not clear from the specs. It’s the fact that something or the other just doesn’t work that well. I’ve had bad proximity sensors, bad gps, rather poor ram management (still there on my more expensive Samsung). It’s not the chip or the cameras that bother me, it’s the stuff like the quality of the sensors, wifi, bluetooth etc. After my last $200 phone, I bought a Samsung galaxy s20 FE 1.5 years after it launched. Soooooo much better than anything I’ve had in terms of consistency and not letting me down on the daily. So my motto is going to be old flagship, rather than new mid-ranger. And if I can afford it, new flagship I guess.