"Workstation" vs. performance PC of same brand / components

Our IT director has ordered a PC to my chosen specs. This will be a demo unit to replace my old workstation which has been flaking out
lately and potentially supplied to the rest of the department.
So their supplier (CDW) has offered a computer of the same specs and brand (HP) except one is in their workstation line and the other is from their performance PC line. Being a demo, he chose the non- workstation option and we can swap later if it's not the right choice. I'm not uncomfortable with this, but I know we'll use this next round of computers for 4+ years and we need dead reliable equipment.
Aside from a more beefy looking case and maybe better PSU and motherboard, I'm not sure what else would elevate a PC into a "workstation". And I'm not certain that the PSU and mobo are even significantly better. The only question I have is related to expandability for additional RAM and the wattage rating of the PSUs.
For those of you who have faced this decision, what is your opinion?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

An answer filtered through that explained the cost savings: the non- workstation was not a full sized motherboard and case. So not only are the components of lesser quality the case was too small to fit a quality graphics card. And the cost savings was a few hundred bucks which made no sense. So if anyone else considers this option don't bother, get the workstation platform.
There is a workstation computer in the mail now. :)
David
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.