T-90 is an upgrade of T-72, so false analogy.
Not false at all. Your logic was
specifically that the
Vulkan should be considered 1960s technology because it is a a "mere upgrade" of the
Bazalt; by the exact same logic, the entire lineage of tanks descended from the T-34 should all be considered 1920s technology, because each and every one of them has been a "mere upgrade" from the previous one all the way down the line.
So the T90 is a "mere upgrade" of the T-72, which is a "mere upgrade" of the T-64, which is a "mere upgrade" of the T-55, and so on.
P-700, P-800, Kalibr and Zircon are what all current generations of Russian surface ships and submarines are getting, so yeah, sounds like Russia is giving up on the P-1000.
You clearly don't know what you're talking about, because the P-700
Granit is just as old as the P-500
Bazalt, substantially older and less sophisticated than the P-1000
Vulkan. The Bazalt and Granit are in fact sister designs that use essentially the same missile avionics; the difference is that the Granit has a ramjet engine as opposed to the Bazalt's turbojet engine, at the cost of being
even huger.
Russia is "giving up" on
the entire superheavy antiship missile family only in the sense that they can no longer afford to build warships big enough to accommodate them; there is no direct successor to the
Kirov or Slava class, only lesser warships armed with medium-weight antiship missiles such as Moskit and Oniks. Moskit for example is literally only half the weight of Granit. But giving up Bazalt/Vulkan/Granit essentially means giving up the ability to credibly attack U.S. carrier battlegroups; the lesser missiles do not cut it against top tier opponents, which is the entire reason the Soviet fleet built its main combatant missile cruisers around the superheavy AShMs.
