Yes. It also takes him four attacks to equal one spell from the sorcerer. And it takes a paladin smiting to equal that damage. That's kind of what balance looks like - when going balls to the wall, everyone does a lot of damage (and fighters maybe edge out others in a lot of situations, just because additional attacks tend to eclipse smites and spells due to additive effects, but there are more limited niches where spells and smites are probably better). In 5e,
everyone's a Striker.
Again, your fighter is hardly damage-optimized, so it shouldn't be exactly shocking that party members who spike damage spike it harder. You're not investing as much into it. If you want to shift the goals again to the ranger, you'll have to bring in subclass options - the ranger's getting damage from being a Hunter. Compare "+ 1d8 damage on everything that's already been hit" (which is quite good!) with
advantage on every melee attack you get for an entire turn. If advantage turns even one miss of yours into a hit, you're out-damaging the normal ranger, and if it turns two, you're out-damaging the fighter/ranger, since your attacks will do more than 1d8 damage. And if it turns one of those misses into a crit, you're doing EVEN BETTER. Not to mention that it applies to STR saves you might make as well, giving you a powerful antidote to low rolls against forced movement/entanglement-style effects (really just the cherry on top of that advantage sundae). A bog-standard Champion wouldn't have that, but they'd have improved critical, so they'd be adding much more than 1d8 onto their attacks in the long run.
Ultimately, though, my purpose here isn't to persuade you that your fighter is powerful, but merely to point out that "5e fighters are clearly weak" is not a statement with a strong foundation. Your character is already in the same league as paladins, sorcerers, and rangers. That you feel that it isn't doesn't seem to match with the reality of what I see happening in play. I don't see your fighter's four-hit Action Surge'd advantage'd attack round and say "that seems weak," I say, "dang, I wish I could do that once every fight." The fighter isn't under-performing. In fact, the weakest member of our party in terms of damage output is probably either the rogue/battlemaster (who has a bit of a "good at several things, not REALLY good at anything" issue, but can still be dang impressive with a superiority + sneak attack), or the wild mage (because an enemy who makes a save is an enemy who I spent a lot of resources on doing nothing to, plus everyone likes being
confused, right?!).
Fighters are not clearly weak, and your comparison with the sorcerer, the paladin, and the ranger all come up roughly on par, if not often better.
