Most games aren't min-maxed on either side, and in those cases, otherwise marginal classes like fighters can do OK - in combat. Outside of combat, as T2 pointed out, fighters are pretty useless compared to other classes.
In games with strong tactical play, fighters are junky. They're one-trick ponies, blowing all their feats to become dungeoncrashers or chaingun trippers or shit like that. Divine Power + Righteous Might makes the cleric deal more damage and take more hits, while still having all of his cleric spells.
The fighter is the most gear-dependent / group-dependent class as well. Without the right gear, they're worse off than any other class in the game, mainly because they don't have many special abilities. Once again, in a game with a more casual style of play, this may not be an issue - the DM may always have his flying enemies land and close for melee combat, his villains may never sunder the PCs' gear, and wizards are always within charge distance - but in a game with strong tactical play, the fighter is simply too brittle and specialised a class to really be much good.
PH2, while containing some good feats, doesn't fix the underlying structural weakness of the fighter. In fact, it makes some of it more brutal. The best high level feats in it have tons of pre-reqs that lock a fighter in many levels beforehand, and often contain marginal or questionable selections, and offer minimal benefits. It also encourages the one-trick pony aspect, and doesn't really do anything to give fighters more non-combat options, or more gear-independent options.
Incidentally, the core fighter's strongest tactical option - two-handed sunder - is disastrous strategically because it reduces the treasure the party gets. That's how well thought-out the fighter is as a class.