I’ve tested dozens of cheap smartphones – they should all ditch this premium feature

I’ve been reviewing smartphones at Tech Advisor for almost five years, but a recent trend among cheap handsets has left me feeling very frustrated.

The majority of devices I’ve tested would be considered affordable – either budget or mid-range phones, usually costing less than £500/$500.

So, when compared to flagships, compromise is inevitable. I’ve become accustomed to reduced performance, a lower-quality display and less capable cameras.

But fierce competition among Android phones has forced companies to be savvy with where they make these sacrifices, to the extent that you might not always notice.

As a result, you can get a formidable handset for less than a third of the price of Samsung’s top-of-the-line Galaxy S24 Ultra, which is only really worth buying if you’re a phone enthusiast.

That phone has an impressive ultrasonic under-display fingerprint sensor, but most cheap handsets use an inferior optical version, which ends up being a pale imitation of the real thing.

I understand that after phones practically eliminated the screen bezels a few years ago, a new alternative to a PIN, pattern or password was necessary.

One option is an improved face unlock, as Apple has done with Face ID on the iPhone. It’s secure enough to be used to authenticate payments or log into apps, something only the Honor Magic 6 Pro can match on the Android side.

On most other handsets, you get a basic face unlock that doesn’t usually work in the dark and can sometimes be fooled with a picture of you.

I understand that advanced Face ID-style sensors aren’t realistic on affordable phones, but that doesn’t mean under-display fingerprint scanners are the answer.

Frustrating shortcomings

My first issue is the target area for your finger, which tends to be frustratingly small. Unless you place it in exactly the right position, the phone simply won’t recognise it.

They also tend to be extremely sensitive to moisture. If your finger happens to be slightly wet or sweaty, good luck trying to unlock your phone.

And then there’s the speed: cheap under-display scanners are noticeably slower than more advanced ones, and also when compared to the physical scanners of old.

The best alternative

So, I say we should go back to physical ones, which are still generally fast, reliable and much more resistant to moisture than under-display versions.

And don’t worry, you don’t have to give up a modern design to include it. Simply build the fingerprint sensor into the power button, as we’ve seen on devices such as the Samsung Galaxy A15 5G and Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 5G.

The target area for your index finger is still small, but in my experience, it unlocks the phone almost 100% of the time. With this approach, you get the extra security of fingerprint authentication, without any of the bulk or frustrations of an under-display sensor.

Rather than it feeling like a step back, companies should be willing to embrace a sensor placement that is often overlooked, yet offers the best of both worlds for cheap smartphones.

For now, high-end phones can keep their more sophisticated under-display fingerprint scanners. There are some good ones out there, but you won’t find them on budget handsets. It’s time for a change.