In general, technology advances at a rate proportional to the number of people times the stability of the society times the wealth surplus times competition.
The stability of the society permits records of what was invented to stay around.
The wealth surplus is required to give people time to invent. If you are spending every ounce of effort just staying afloat, you don't invent revolutionary things.
The number of people reflects the fact that a new invention pays off for everyone but only has to be perfected once.
Competition reflects the fact that an overly stable centralized society can ossify without competing power centers. With competing power centers, innovation can give one of them an advantage and failing to take up the new innovation causes that one to replace the others.
This reflects our own history. A long time of glacially slow "technological advancement" with little surplus and low populations. Technology would advance during stable times, and retreat during collapses.
10000 or so years ago agricuture and settlements increase stability and surplus. The rate of change increases slightly. Writing is invented, allowing information to pass from generation to generation with less cost.
We see the rise of megacultures, like the Egyptians, and the various farming communities. Amazing technologies, sometimes biological (crops and animals) are developed.
Population numbers increase. Empires rise and fall, progress goes 3 steps forward and 2 steps back.
History begins, in that narrative stories come down from the next age of history (and not just tax documents/royal proclamations/etc). At this point we have a number of high population density settled peoples and a myriad of nomadic people's.
Population densities grow. Logistics of empire (a form of technology) gets better, and larger empires form. Some societies manage centuries of stability. Dark ages still come and go.
Then the "age of exploration" -- which might better be called the age of global connection. Direct trade routes that wrap the world bring innovations from the entire world to the entire world. European states compete without destroying each other by conquoring the world instead of each other. Populations swell. Growth and innovation accellerate.
Then things change again. The industrial revolution begins in Great Britian. The world's raw resources flow into the new industrial state. Trade networks continue to strengthen. Private competition within the state becomes a possibility, permitting a society with both stability and intense competition between power centers.
In short, what you imagine as a reasonable pace of change requires a huge amount of support. A small tribe of people won't be able to manage that level of change, and even if they knew how wouldn't be able to build an industrial civilization because they lack the people to maintain it.
Small, isolated populations don't rapidly change without falling apart.