Quote (ChingeR @ Mar 27 2015 04:40am)
Because overclocking your cpu will make it's lifespan shorter.
i7 will always be better than an i5 in any case if money isn't the problem. I guess it's not in this case.
ALSO, if you would like to OC your i5 to be anywhere close to the performance of an i7, you're gonna have to buy an aftermarket cooler which will make the money difference smaller, making the i7 more viable.
I'd say i7 if you can. I woulda gone with i7.
What if he wants to start editing records of his gameplay? i7 would be faaaar more superior than an i5.
(Not saying that an i5 is bad, just saying an i7 is far better)
Overclocking has little impact on a CPU's lifespan as long as it is properly cooled. Also, an i5-4690k can reach 4.0 GHz or higher under stock voltage. In fact, it matches the 4790k's overclocking potential usually as I personally was able to OC my 4690k to 4.8 GHz at 1.31v and my 4790k to 4.8 GHz at 1.30v. You can also look reviews and other overclocks regarding the two CPU's. If you keep it at stock voltage, an after market cooler is unnecessary.
As to the video encoding, take a look at this:
Between the 4790k and 4690k at equal clock speeds (4.8 GHz), the i7 performed an entire 4.22% better than the i5 did. Granted, this is only one application, but its a free one and common one used for minor video edits and renders. Also, yes, it is a multi-threaded application. So, the $100 difference gives you 4% increased performance.
I'm failing to see how the 4790k is
faaaar superior to the 4690k. If you have any information that may help, please let me know.