I can't honestly say I have enough first hand experience to say anything about that one way or the other.
I have a 120GB OWC 6G Extreme on a 6G SATA port, which I initially benchmarked at >480MB/s with AJA disk tester; I'm not sure whether it uses incompressible or compressible data for its test (guessing compressible). A little less than a year of relatively heavy use later with about 45GB remaining free, Aja shows ~410MB/s read and write. Blackmagic tester, which definitely uses incompressible data, I'm seeing about 140MB/s write and >400B/s read. I would take that to mean that it does, indeed, have worse incompressible writes than a larger drive with the same hardware otherwise, but it's also possible it's an artifact of the way the test works (Blackmagic's tester seems kind of erratic, and I'm almost positive I saw much higher numbers a few months ago) or just heavy use of the drive.
In any case, you'll get 250MB/s at absolute best, regardless of what drive you put in the thing; based on that, unless you were planning on carrying the same drive over to a new system in the future, I'd personally go with the Electra--lower price, fast enough performance to saturate the bus.
I personally tend to stick with OWC due to the good warranty (they sure went all-out trying to address the 6G compatibility issues, and even bumped the Extreme to 5 years retroactively after the Electra came out), plus US builds, but they also have tested as VERY good when it comes to automatic garbage collection with an HFS+ volume--much better than, for example, Intel's offerings. Now, it's completely possible (likely even) that the current-generation Sandforce-based drives all handle Mac-format garbage collection equally well--I haven't thus far seen a heavy stress test on other manufacturer drives in terms of how good their garbage collection is--but that gave me a good feeling about them from the start.