I have visited neither zoo and am judging by pictures and the discussion in this thread so far (which has been interesting).
the topic is reptiles, amphibians, fish, and invertebrates.
On the one hand we have a zoo whose vivaria I would qualify as a good 'pet-shop' standard: square glass boxes of adequate size and lighting/heating with some natural features such as plants, rocks, wood, etc. It's most recent development looks like more square boxes, but of a larger size (e.g. for large crocodiles). It's red sea tank contains fake coral (a mortal sin imo).
The other zoo has been redefining what zoo husbandry could/should mean for 20(?), 30(?) years with its tropical and subtropical 'ecodisplays', which very much includes ectotherm life. It's most recent development is unique and innovative in how it displays the mangrove ecosystem including its ectotherm inhabitants.
...
The question for deciding between the two zoos for me amounts to this: As an 'ectotherm-enthusiast' would I rather have the responsibles of Burgers' or Wroclaw zoo design and build the major addition to my own home zoo? Which development does a better job in displaying ectotherm life, an 'afrykarium' or a 'mangrove'?
For me, the case is clear.