Affordable Android Phones

Smartphones are essential nowadays. We are constantly using them in so many ways. It is not just calling or texting anymore. We listen to music, play games, play online slots, watch movies, use fitness apps and so much more. Even though they are so useful, practical, and versatile, smartphones don’t always have to be a burden on the wallet. In this article, you will find out which affordable devices we recommend.

Android smartphones up to £ 200 – buy cheap mobile phones

The smartphone market is growing rapidly and is still producing more expensive models with all kinds of features and functions. Not infrequently, however, these are rather nice gimmicks for which manufacturers charge a hefty surcharge. The category of low-budget smartphones in the price range up to a maximum of 200 to 250 pounds seems to be almost drowned here. Smartphones from the entry-level segment often already offer all the functions that are needed for comfortable use in everyday life. Above all, basic functions, including classic phone calls, chatting via messenger, calling up news and weather, and surfing the Internet, are also available on cheap smartphones. Even some games can already be played on the devices.

Before buying a new cell phone, you need to know there is no such thing as the perfect device. Is the battery particularly important to you? Do you value a good display very much? Does the equipment have to be convincing? No model under 200 pounds will cover all your needs, so you have to decide what is most important to you.

Test winner under 200 pounds: Xiaomi Redmi Note 10


Full-colour OLED display

Very long-lasting battery (14:10 hours)

Solid Android performance

Good quality quad camera


No wireless charging

At first glance, many budget smartphones can hardly be distinguished from their high-end counterparts. The large displays are the main reason for this. The Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 has a 6.4-inch OLED screen, which extends almost over the entire front – only a minimal notch is left out for the internal camera.

The display offers a resolution of 2,400 x 1,080 pixels and always presents content sharply with a pixel density of 409 ppi. In addition, there is a high brightness of 856 cd / m² and a wide variety of colours typical of OLEDs, which even make the entire extended DCI-P3 Covers color space. Only the average contrast values ​​and the standard refresh rate of 60 Hertz differ from the top devices, but they are completely sufficient.

The combination of the Snapdragon 678 processor and six GB of RAM ensure overall good performance. Although this is far behind the high-end devices from Apple and Co., it makes a lot for the price range. Android 11 and the usual apps run smoothly, for the most part, our test PDF is completely set up within 5.1 seconds via WLAN.

The equipment is quite impressive for a 200 pounds model. Wifi 6 or 5G is not used, but the usual basics are covered. These include LTE mobile communications, dual SIM for two nano-SIM cards, a fingerprint sensor, and a memory card slot for expansion via microSD. USB-C serves as the main interface, but there is a dedicated jack output for headphones. NFC and IP53 protection against spray water are also integrated. The quad-camera, on the other hand, only delivers (good) mediocrity, especially in low light.

With a capacity of 5,000 mAh, the battery is one of the highlights of the Redmi Note 10. In practice, it brings our test model through an impressive 14:10 hours of online use. The included quick-charging power supply unit then charges the cell phone again in just 1:18 hours – after 30 minutes, 64 percent are full. As usual for this price range, wireless charging is not offered.

Price tip under 150 pounds: Motorola Moto G10


Long battery life

Great value for money

Good photos in daylight


Extremely long charging time

Slightly dark display

Good smartphones are also available for less than 150 pounds, as the Motorola Moto G10 proves. However, in this price range, you have to make major compromises.

These start with the display. With a diagonal of 6.5 inches, it is quite large, but only offers an HD resolution of 1,600 x 720 pixels and thus a mixed pixel density of 269 ppi. That’s still okay, but no longer crisp. The LCD panel also provides significantly less color space coverage than OLED screens. In addition, the maximum brightness of only 390 cd / m² is low – in bright ambient light, content on the screen can no longer be clearly seen. The checkerboard contrast of 154: 1 is okay.

The compromises also extend to the performance of the economic device. The Moto G10 has a Snapdragon 460 processor and four GB of RAM. In everyday use, however, this is not a problem, you just shouldn’t expect top performance. The Moto G10 took an acceptable 8.5 seconds to render our test PDF.

The other technical features of the G10 also cover the basics, but not only lack luxury features. Once again, USB-C is used as the main interface and headphones can be connected via the separate headphone output. The memory can be expanded via microSD, a fingerprint sensor and NFC are also available.

The LTE speed of 150 Mbit / s is lower than that of the test winners (but still fast enough) and the protection against water is also weaker with the IP52 certification – at least dripping water should not cause any problems according to the classification. The quad-camera cuts a fine figure in daylight offers 120fps slow motion and rotates videos in FHD resolution. However, the images weaken again in low light.

The highlight of the economic model is the battery. With a capacity of 5,000 mAh, it took our test device online for 14:15 hours, but it also took an extremely long time to recharge. When switched off and using the included power supply, the Moto G10 needed a whopping 03:49 hours – after 30 minutes it was only 21 percent full.

Are random number generators really random?

All fair, modern slot machines rely on a Random Number Generator (RNG) that is hardware-based and, as such, generates random numbers by sampling naturally occurring electromagnetic noise. Random numbers are not derived by means of a repeatable algorithm, or set of rules, so even if the starting point, or any other number, in a sequence is known, the sequence cannot be reproduced at a later date.

The outcome of each spin of the reels of a slot machine is determined by the RNG, which generates thousands of random numbers per second. Consequently, while the outcome may be winning or losing, depending on the exact millisecond when the reels are activated, the player cannot predict what will happen, one way or the other, and each spin is an independent, truly random event. Indeed, it is the combination of fair, random numbers and other mathematical considerations, such as the weighting of the virtual reels, pay table and so on, that provide a casino with its house edge on slot machines.

By contrast, a so-called Pseudo Random Number Generator (PRNG) is software-based and relies on mathematical algorithms to mimic randomness based on a 32-bit integer, known as a ‘seed value’. However, PNRG algorithms can be reverse-engineered, such that the exact sequence of pseudo-random numbers for each seed value can be predicted. In the past, this vulnerability has been exploited by unscrupulous individuals, who have illicitly profited by hundreds of thousands, or millions, of pounds from slot machines at casinos worldwide. Consequently, the PNRG is a thing of the past as far as slot machines are concerned.

Is it possible to predict when a slot machine will pay out?

It is, or at least was, possible to predict when a slot machine will pay out. In a well-chronicled case, a criminal gang based in St. Petersburg, Russia successfully reverse-engineered the pseudo-random number generator (PRNG) employed by certain, older model slot machines, so that they could predict, with split-second accuracy, when a payout was due. The gang employed dozens of operatives, each of whom could reportedly profit by $250,000 a week, to exploit this vulnerability in slot machines in casinos in eastern and central Europe and in the United States.

The problem with a PRNG, as casinos discovered to their cost, is that results appear random, but are not, in fact, truly random. The algorithm, or set of rules, that generates pseudo-random numbers is initialised by a 32-bit integer value, known as a ‘seed value’; if the starting point in the sequence is known, the sequence can be reproduced at a later date.

The answer, as far as modern slot machines are concerned, was replacing the PRNG with a true random number generator (TRNG), which relies on atmospheric noise, rather than an algorithm, to generate random numbers. Consequently, it is impossible to predict when any modern slot machine, in a bricks-and-mortar casino or online, will pay out. The return to player (RTP) percentage, which describes what proportion of money wagered on a slot machine is returned to players over time, indicates what you can expect in the long-term, but not what to expect from one spin to the next.

Is card counting illegal?

Card counting is a technique employed by so-called ‘advantage’ Blackjack players to reverse the house edge – which is less than 1% in any case – and give themselves a small mathematical edge, typically between 0.5% and 1.5%, over the game.

One of the most popular card counting techniques, known as the ‘high-low count’, assigns a value of -1 to aces, court cards and tens, which are considered favourable to the player, +1 to twos, threes, fours, fives and sixes, which are considered favourable to the dealer, and 0 to sevens, eights and nines, which are considered neutral. Fairly obviously, at the start of a shoe the so-called ‘running count’ is 0, so the card counter simply adds or subtracts the appropriate value as each cards is revealed. The final step is to divide the running count by the number of decks left in the shoe, or a rough approximation thereof, to provide the so-called ‘true count’. As the true count rises and falls, the card counter can raise and lower his bets, and adjust his playing strategy, accordingly.

As far as legality is concerned, card counting essentially involves just basic arithmetic and requires nothing more sophisticated than the human brain, so is perfectly legal. Of course, card counters cannot win every hand they play; it is only over the course of hundreds of hours playing and tens of thousands of hands that they can expect to make a profit. Even so, casinos take a dim view of card counting and, if they suspect that a player has an advantage over the game, even in the long-term, take steps to remove the advantage. This could simply involve shuffling the cards when a card counter raises his bet or, in certain jurisdictions, to stop playing Blackjack and/or leave the premises.

1 2 3 21