i5 vs i7

Solution
That i7 is faster in two ways:

1) almost 12% faster under load (Turbo), and

2) has over 30% more processing available with hyperthreading (mostly future proofing for gaming when games are better threaded but a few games now can benefit)

(hyperthreading is when another thread of code runs during the "wait" times that the same CPU core isn't doing anything as it's waiting for new data.)

So...
best case scenario you might have 50% more processing available on that i7 vs that i5. So again, it's not something you'd notice much now but it will extend the life of the computer (though HANDBRAKE or other well threaded applications will run faster now)
That i7 is faster in two ways:

1) almost 12% faster under load (Turbo), and

2) has over 30% more processing available with hyperthreading (mostly future proofing for gaming when games are better threaded but a few games now can benefit)

(hyperthreading is when another thread of code runs during the "wait" times that the same CPU core isn't doing anything as it's waiting for new data.)

So...
best case scenario you might have 50% more processing available on that i7 vs that i5. So again, it's not something you'd notice much now but it will extend the life of the computer (though HANDBRAKE or other well threaded applications will run faster now)
 
Solution

Unless you are running code that has been explicitly tuned for HT, HT does not wait for "wait times", it simply provides an alternate instruction pool with few/no dependencies for the scheduler to keep issue ports busy with. If both threads have a similar amount of instructions eligible for execution, processing resources get split roughly 50-50 between the two. The two threads end up running at ~65% of the speed they would run at on a dedicated core but since the core is running both concurrently, the core's total throughput is ~130% of what it would be without HT.