Or are there any other animals as large or larger than humans but with less physical strength?
[May be hard to compare in all cases, since there are different types of strength.]
How about jellyfish?
Like you said, it depends on the definition of ‘strength’. IIRC, humans are the best long distance runners on the planet, so assuming I’m recalling that correctly that’s a kind of strength that we excel at. If you mean raw lifting power then we are pretty weak, at least compared to other primates. We can probably bench press more than a comparably sized deer, but then a deer is going to have a hard time using a bench press. 
The answer is sloths
While we’re on it, I’m not sure how ‘strong’ some of the larger dogs really are. Great Danes look stunning from my point of view, but they don’t look particularly strong. Maybe I’m wrong though
Remember that while mammals certainly are animals, not all animals are mammals!
I think you’re wrong about dogs… growing up with bulldogs, I wasn’t stronger than a 60 lb bulldog until I was probably well over twice as heavy, and my mother (a short, small woman) was not strong enough to walk our male bulldog on a leash. I think Great Danes are pretty strong.
Fair enough, I have very little experience with dogs so I was probably wrong 
It’s just that, every time I see a Great Dane, I can’t help but think “I would totally beat that dog at armwrestling”.
In general, Primates are pretty powerful, pound for pound. So, a human in perfect condition will likely be stronger -pound for pound- than many other mammals.
Of course, we lack claws, sharp teeth, etc. And certainly other primates are stronger than us.
But one explorer managed to wrestle a leopard that jumped him, and pin it until he could get out a knife to kill it- and the man only had one arm (and cajones the size of basketballs, sure) .
I was told that as something to remember when dealing with mountain lions. Remember that when it comes down to it, an adult human can give one enough of a beating that they should think twice about attacking, especially since for them a broken bone or a wound big enough to get infected is terminal even if they “win”. We aren’t used to fighting for our lives, but we’re stronger than we think.
So, no matter what kind of radioactive critter you get bit by, it’ll be an improvement.
I assume you’re talking about Carl Akeley.He didn’t use a knife, he actually killed it with his bare hands. He had two good arms, but the leopard had seized on of them. He killed it by ramming his hand further down its throat and basically strangling it from the inside.
The leopard weighed less than Akeley, but even bare-handed humans are not necessarily pushovers for predators.
We are also rather chubby compared to other mammals, even when fit, which may help in a wrestling match, but hurts in pound-for-pound strength comparisons.
Cite:
1987 “Fat and figures”, by Caroline Pond (Ph.D., Senior Lecturer in Biology at the Open University in Milton Keynes) New Scientist 4:62-66.
pg. 63:
“More than half the 31 captive monkeys that we examined were less than 5 per cent fat, thinner than most laboratory rodents, although all of them had continuous access to food and little opportunity to exercise. However, a few of the monkeys kept in the same way became obese, and at more than 25 per cent fat, were fatter than normal rats. Males and females were equally fat. In contrast, a typical “reference man” is estimated to be 15 per cent by weight adipose tissue, and a “reference woman” 27 per cent.”
How does the jaw power of other animals compare to the gripping power of the human hand?
Yes, thank you, that’s the guy. Badass indeed.
For human grip strength, I found a NASA documentthat puts the maximum grip strength for men in a range of 467 Newtons to 729 Newtons with a mean of 596 N. By contrast, the most powerful animal bite is, according to this National Geographic article, is the saltwater crocodile. It registered an astounding 16,460 Newtons of bite force.
Interestingly, your own bite strength is about a third more powerful than your grip.
Sloths are tiny.
Apparently humans are far far weaker than primates like chimps etc. So making a generalization about primates doesn’t really address the question.
That’s a classic case of “the exception that proves the rule”. The reason this gets written up like it does is because it’s such an outlier. Plus he didn’t kill it by brute strength, which is what I’m asking.
Note that while chimps are stronger than humans in general, the difference in strength has been exaggerated in popular media.
Yeah, and they can’t throw a baseball (or a spear) worth a shit, either.
It’s partly an outlier because most humans don’t have to fight other animals often, and don’t lead the sort of lives that would make them fit for it. I think you have to consider this when deciding what evidence you’ll accept.
As for the last sentence, it sounds like he kind of did, at least as far as animals tend to use “brute strength” to kill. You’re not likely to see an arm wrestling contest. The only fights that are “fair” battles of strength that I can think of are generally non-lethal competitions for mates, etc.
Yeah, he basically did. As I posted above, DrDeth got the details wrong. Akeley was unarmed and essentially overpowered the leopard. And Akeley was not by any means a Hercules. In his photos, he appears to be of average build. (Admittedly, he outweighed the animal.)
Big cats and other predators are lethal because of their teeth and claws. Akeley won because the leopard wasn’t able to bring its teeth and claws to bear effectively.
I’m not sure that it’s a given that a big cat is stronger pound for pound than a human living under natural conditions, that is a hunter gatherer life style with a great deal of exercise every day.
In the steer-wrestling event in rodeos humans wrestle much heavier animals to the ground. Now much of this is due to employing leverage but humans still are able to overpower substantially larger animals.