Yes, it is exactly the same drill. Intel really need to re-evaluated their efforts in SMT, HT is and has been pointless for a long time now. For gaming you are better off saving the $100+ and settling on a i5.
Obviously for gaming the HT makes almost no difference in increased performance, but the i7 certainly can be worth the extra $100 for some people. The HT gives a huge benefit for people doing video editing and CPU demanding tasks. There are many things that people do on computers besides gaming, for those people the extra $100 on an i7 can be well justified, even and extra $400 on a 6 core CPU. Everything just depends on what you want to do with your system, and your budget.
Ok, seems like I was right, just that one of my friends bought a 2600k recently and I was like WTF, you don't even do anything with movies except watch them, why do you need HT and he said he doesn't he just wanted an i7 I was like *Facepalm*, you coulda got a Nvidia GTX 580 with that extra $ >.< some people in life you just wanna take oout the back and shoot eh? xD
Intel really need to re-evaluated their efforts in SMT, HT is and has been pointless for a long time now.
Complete bunk. HT is a fantastic way extracting an extra 30% of performance out of existing silicon by interleaving instructions from 2 different streams during waits from memory accesses, cache misses, branch predictor miss, etc. It obviously won't benefit anything that doesn't run more than 4 (on an i7) strong threads, but for applications that do, the performance gain is impressive, especially considering how little silicon HT takes. HT (and the L3 cache) is the reason that the difference between the i5-2500K and the i7-2600K (only 100 MHz clock speed) is much greater than the difference between the i7-2600K and the i7-2700K (also just 100 MHz, but no difference in HT support here).