KneeTheCap: So would i7 be more cost-efficient than i5 ?
Well, quite the reverse imho
Basically, the i7 adds 33% more cache and hyperthreading to the i5. For video edition and a very limited number of applications and games, the ability to emulate 8 cores makes some difference. But for the largest number, the 4 cores are more than sufficient and you may want to prfer a better GPU or more RAM to a more powerful CPU
Moreover, unless you want to overclock, CPUs ending with a k ( 4670k/4770k) add nothing to their regular counterpart (4670/4770)
If it's cost effectiveness you're after, you could even consider the i5 4570. It's only marginally less powerful than the 4670 but less expensive (170€ vs 200€) . The 4440 is only marginally less expensive than the 4570 ( 165€) but the performance gap is about the same as between the 4670 and the 4570. To make it simple :
a 4440 is 3% cheaper than a 4570 , but offers 8% less performance
a 4570 is 10% cheaper than a 4670 , but offers 6% less performance
a 4670 is 33% cheaper than a 4770, offers 3% to 18% less performance, depending on the application
edit : hadn't read the table correctly. In single thread apps a 4770 i7 is 3% faster than a 4670 i5 , not 1%