Stick with the Mystique 220. It's newer, faster and supports DirectX 3 (Millennium supports DirectX 2).

Yeah, SGRAM of any Mystique will run at significantly higher frequency then Millennium's WRAM, so I wouldn't expect any better performance. If you have older Millennium it can even have slower dac then Mystique 220.

I own both these cards. When it comes to 2D they are very similar in practice, as the Mystique is in many ways a rebranded Millennium II with gaming capabilities (MSI, D3D). The Mystique is probably a tad quicker in 2D. All in all you can do more with your Mystique card than your Millennium. For VGA output quality both these cards are solid.

Mystique preceded Millenium 2, they seem to have identical 3d.

I think Millennium 2 is faster than Mystique 220 at 2D if you are using a high resolution like 1600x1200. In D3D they seem identical, even displaying the same bugs.

I avoid Matrox cards prior to G200 though because of audio and image corruption problems I have had using them.
http://web.textfiles.com/computers/vgakills.txt

Uhm, guys, he's comparing a first generation Millennium to a second generation Mystique. The Mystique 220 is definately better than a first generation Millennium.

I was responding to chat about Mystique vs the other cards. I've seen benchmarks showing the WRAM cards doing comparatively better with 2D at 1600x1200.

Matrox is so overrated that it's silliness anyway. For gaming+2D there are much better options like a Voodoo3 or almost any NV card (just have to find one that's not blurry).

Thanks guys for all your comments.
That helps me to save some money. I'll stick with my Mystique.

As an alternative, I have a VirgeDX with 4MB. Perhaps I'll have some time around christmas to compare it to the mystique in the P233 MMX system.

@swaaye
Yes, there are better cards, but for the P233MMX I was looking for a contemporary one. A Voodoo3 or any NV card is at least three years too "new" 😀