Honestly, it shouldn't matter which one you go with. Some drives, even though they're the same physically, record different model numbers based on who is selling the drive or flashing firmware to the drive, especially in the instance of OEMs like HP or Lenovo. In my research I did find that the SSDSA2CW160G310 works with Mac just fine. However, Mac OS seems to have issues supporting TRIM, so the drives don't generally perform as well as they would in something like your HP. That would be the case for any SSD that takes advantage of TRIM though, so it's not related to this exact drive. It's related to Mac OS.
You can see the feed back on the SSDSA2CW160G310 here, where at least one user mentions support for Mac. The main concern is the firmware, which I'll outline next.
If I were you, I wouldn't buy either of these drives. The firmware on the 320 is still buggy, despite the latest firmware claiming to have fixed it. If you do buy a 320 series, know that you should update the firmware immediately. More so, the 320 is SATA II, so if you have a SATA III capable system it will be going to waste.
From what I read in another post, just today, the 330 series will be out soon and will be much more affordable and also support SATA III.
The Intel 520 series, from what I read, is having BSOD issues - so that wouldn't be a good alternative, in case you were wondering.
The Crucial M4 is already out and will probably cost the same or less than the Intel 320, and offers much better performance and stability. Just some food for thought, as you can get a 120GB M4 for less than $160...
According to the table on page 4 in the Intel Product Resource Guide Q4 2011 (http://embeddedcomputingsystems.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Intel_InsideSpread-pg1-28-v2b.pdf), the difference between SSDSA2CW160G301 and SSDSA2CW160G310 is that the former is a single part and the latter is a pack of ten.