You know how I can tell you didn't read my post? Because you're just reiterating all of the points that I already spent a lot of time accurately disproving. The i5 is not faster where it really counts - multithreaded performance - and in other ways is horribly deficient as either a budget gamer or a high-end gamer. It has no easy place in any build - similar CPUs from both Intel and AMD above and below it in the pricing bracket make for much more compelling purchases. An i5 really only makes sense if you plan on replacing your gaming-only PC processor within 2-3 years, which is really a brutal turnaround time for a lot of us.
I know you're not going to change your opinion based on what I've said, so I'll just leave it at that. I don't find your arguments very compelling, and I understand them completely.
I'll just quote right from the first damn frame of the vid I posted which PROVES my point beyond any doubt you might try to cast:
"the i5 struggles to compete at stock speeds, improving with via [sic] a 4.6ghz overclock but the 4790K - even at stock clocks - produces better performance across the overall run of play here."
The problem here is that you just do not understand frame variance or the games industry's design trajectory at all.
What on earth do you think Unity, Cryengine, Unreal 5, and every. single. major. modern. engine. have in common today? Oh, that's right - support for (and the expectation of the usage of) large numbers of threads.
i5 sucks, your opinion sucks.
More proof that you did not actually watch the video I posted, lol. Have fun with your preconceived notions and horrible performance a few years from now.