I wanted to try my hand at this with Plain-format, because the example seemed (to me) to lack consistency. That is, only the very last entry above the \hrule got an alignment. So here's what it'd look like if the rest of them are aligned:
\def\myeqalign#1{\openup-1\jot\eqalign{#1}}% negate the cumulative \openup1\jot
\let\To\Rightarrow
$$\myeqalign{% creates a 2-col align (1st col flush-right, 2nd flush-left),
% which starts off with \openup1\jot
\omit% omit the align preamble for this col, 'cause we don't want flush-right
$\left\{\myeqalign{y&=2x-5\cr4x-2y-10&=0\cr}\right.\To$\hfill\cr
\noalign{\smallskip}% insert a small vertical skip between the rows
\To\left\{\myeqalign{2x-y-5=0\cr4x-2y-10=0}\right.
\left|\matrix{\cdot(-2)\cr\cdot1}\right|
+\myeqalign{-4x+2y+10&=0\cr4x-2y-10&=0\cr}\cr\noalign{\hrule}
0=0\,}$$

Whereas, if I am trying to mimic the "This is what I need"-part:
$$\myeqalign{\omit$\cases{y=2x-5\cr4x-2y-10=0}\;\To$\hfil\cr\noalign{\medskip}
\To\cases{2x-y-5=0\cr4x-2y-10=0}\enspace\left|\matrix{\cdot(-2)\cr\cdot1}\right|\enspace
+\myeqalign{-4x+2y+10&=0\cr4x-2y-10&=0}\cr\noalign{\hrule}
0=0}$$
\bye

There are additional differences with both horizontal and vertical spacing.
To wrap it up, Plain's \matrix centers its column contents, with columns \quad apart from eachother. \eqalign has two columns; first flush-right, second flush-left. \cases has two columns; first flush-left in math-mode, and the second in text-mode, \quad apart.
Regardless of which one you'll use (and I'm pretty sure this includes LaTeX's equivalents), you'll always end up using \halign (horizontal alignment) "under the hood", which can be thought of as a table.