Less magnification, greater field of view.
In general, the higher the quality, the better: resolution, contrast, decreased Chromatic abberation, better coating etc, etc
Ideally, the Razor would have a preferable image across the entire magnification range. The PST may have a bit more mag, but it will be useless if you end up dialing down because of an unusable image.
Now before anyone decide to keel-hual me, these are general statements. I did have an HS (4-16) and it was a great scope for the money (similar if not the same glass as the PST). I always found myself dialing back because of the lack of contrast at higher mags. After I got my NF, there was no way I could go back.
Not that I dont have any other mid range scopes, as a good old Leupy VX3 does great on a hunting rifle. Just for long range, you have to see what you are shooting at.