I'm probably misunderstanding or oversimplifying somehow, but, isn't it also a problem for these types of economic estimates that sometimes the new chips are ac

I'm probably misunderstanding or oversimplifying somehow, but, isn't it also a problem for these types of economic estimates that sometimes the new chips are actually cheaper than the the old chips in today's real world markets? Example: Right now Amazon is listing the overclockable Skylake Core i7 6700K 4 GHz 4 core at $392.76 https://www.amazon.com/Intel-Unlocked-Skylake-Processor-BX80662I76700K/dp/B012M8LXQW/ https://www.amazon.com/Intel-Unlocked-Skylake-Processor-BX80... Also right now, the newer, overclockable Core i7 4.7 GHz 6 core 8700K is offered at $347.06. https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i7-8700K-Processor-Unlocked-BX80684i78700K/dp/B07598VZR8/ https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i7-8700K-Processor-Unlocked-BX8... The newer chip has two additional cores and a higher peak frequency, but it's about $50 cheaper. Would an economist conclude that this means industry output went down in this particular case? How do economists work this sort of market-pricing reality into their estimates of computer industry value?