TOP-5 worst smartphones ever made to avoid buying

Over the past 18 years, the mobile device market has evolved so rapidly that even budget models are able to meet the basic needs of users. However, experts remind us that among the hundreds of offers, there are still frankly weak devices that disappoint with battery life, camera, or screen.

Choice writes about the five worst smartphones.

Motorola Moto G04

The buyer receives only 49% of the total score from the publication.

The camera, display, and performance are frankly weak, and the 33-hour battery life doesn't help. The phone is sturdy, but uncomfortable to use.

Nokia G22

The model can last 34 hours, but experts gave it only 53%.

The performance and camera are disappointing, and the GPS, fingerprint scanner, and mobile networks are unstable. The significantly inflated price makes the device an unprofitable choice.

Nokia G42 5G

The smartphone received 58% in the test.

Despite good durability and a full set of features, the display, camera, performance, and 35-hour battery were only a "solid C". It's worth considering only during a big sale.

Motorola Moto G24

The device shows 59% of the total score.

It loses out to competitors with too slow operation and an indistinct screen, although it sounds loud and high-quality. The battery life of 43 hours does not compensate for these shortcomings.

Google Pixel 8

Another problem is the short battery life in some top models. The smartphone lasted only 19 hours and 30 minutes, scoring 48% for autonomy.

In 2025, when even affordable phones can take decent photos and work for more than a day without recharging, such results look frankly backward.

As a reminder, the Galaxy S25 Edge has only recently become available in a limited number of markets, and sales are not off to a strong start. Samsung's history has shown that even promising models can fail due to technical shortcomings or poor strategic decisions, resulting in serious financial losses.

As we wrote, flagship smartphones try to surprise us with new features every year, but not every innovation makes using them more convenient. Often, these spectacular features are more of a marketing ploy than a practical necessity.