There are AMIX drivers for the Picasso II, and that one's probably a much better card.
I don't think it's so clear cut. Both cards are products of their times.
The A2410 uses the Texas Instruments TIGA graphics architecture, which meant that you told the card through a hardware interface what to render, and how. This required less bandwidth than a "dumb framebuffer" card, and worked sufficiently fast even on a Zorro II card, on a slow machine. The A2410 would use a co-processor to speed up graphics operations. Does this sound familiar? The original Amiga chip set did exactly that, and what the A2410 could do was in a way a step beyond what the Amiga chip set represented.
The Picasso II is a comparatively simpler solution, which combined a frame buffer with programmable resolution and colour options with basic hardware acceleration (an on-board blitter). It was built around a mass-produced SVGA chip made by Cirrus Logic, which accounted for the much lower price you'd have to pay for the end product back in 1993/1994, as compared to the A2410, which was never cheap.
The flexibility, the software support, the robustness of the driver software and in particular how well-integrated the two cards were with Amiga Unix were worlds apart, though. In this respect the Picasso II was the better choice.
