True. I just think for the price the quad i7's could have brought more to the table than 2mb cache and ht. Ht wasn't a 'wow' factor years ago when it was introduced and it's still around the same 10-15% performance boost it was then. If the software is extremely optimized for it, it might bring 20% or so. In other cases it adds nothing. There are a handful of games where it offers higher frames, but not many. There are some games the i5 manages a few frames more than the i7. It can help schedule threads more efficiently, but at the base of it are the same 4 cores the i5's use. 4 cores can still only process 4 cores worth of workload which is evident in the benchmarks why the two are so close to one another. Whenever I see a noticeable difference between the 2, it's comparing them at stock speeds out of the box in which case sure - the i7 comes clocked 500mhz faster which explains the wider margins. Soon as they're both oc'd, that margin gets extremely narrow. Oc'ing may not be the only way to look at it, but in a sense why else compare two 'k' cpu's. The i5's come clocked lower and have higher oc headroom, the i7's come clocked higher and have lower oc headroom. I'm sure they're a bit better binned in the silicon department, but that only shows up as around 100mhz difference in oc top end variance.
Where i7's really shine in encoding, editing, transcoding etc in content creation is in the 6 and 8 core extreme editions, and then there's a lot more involved. Wider pcie lanes, higher memory bandwidth and larger supported ram quanitity, the addition of actual cores and the much larger 15-20mb cache. If someone is using serious programs that need the resources in a professional capacity, chances are they're using a professional workstation platform and rather than gaining a few minutes here or there are shaving hours off of their workload.