Based on what we see in practice at our table. I thought that was evident.
It's a Fighter executing his typical attack action. There are literally no other "specific conditions" to consider. Especially when comparing to other classes who would be affected the same (or worse in the case of the Rogue) by those same "specific conditions."
This is a simple damage comparison between classes. Based on your assertions that Fighters don't deal as much damage as other classes, when that is in fact provably wrong. Yes, this argument absolutely is one of them.
Fine, here is a simple, general, analysis for you that proves my point.
Fighter takes Duelist Fighting Style and is a sword and board. They always attack in tandem, allowing the Rogue to use Sneak Attack every round (the Fighter gets Duelist on every attack of course). Both start with ability mods +3, but the Fighter boosts ASI at 4th and 6th, the Rogue at 4th and 8th. Assuming a hit probability of 60% (reasonable against most ACs regardless of tier). Both use generic d8 weapons, say long sword and rapier.
Note: these are not min/maxed DPR builds, but "standard" types for their classes.
The table shows the results. The Fighter does, on average by level, 1 hp less DPR (yellow) than the Rogue. For 12 of the 20 levels, the Rogue does more damage (red). The levels when the Fighter does more is because of the increase in the number of attacks. Then the Fighter's edge decreases as Sneak Attack improves, eventually losing out again to the Rogue.
This purposefully ignores archetype features, feats, etc. because once you include them, you are no longer looking at the base types.
Now, I will certainly acknowledge that if you give the Fighter a greatsword and Great Weapon Fighting style, the Fighter performs better 13 out of 20 levels with an average DPR increase of about 1.4 over the Rogue. But, again, 1.4 DPR over a base Rogue is hardly impressive and makes me feel like a Fighter is the king of weapon combat.