Gee Spinelli, I stopped looking when I saw 164fps!
Seriously, thanks for taking the time to post your results. I've just spent more than an hour scrutinizing the images. At Sebring, clearly there is a difference looking at the power lines. On the other hand, looking at the clarity of the text of the sign on the right, the leaves on the trees, and the smoothing of roof lines in the distance vary as well. None of examples did particularly well with the chain link fence on the right.
I can't say one way or another whether the test is valid, but methodology seems logical since the same baseline was used. I'm also not sure if setting the correct LOD bias would change the outcome in any way. It isn't clear to me how "Texture Sharpening" does its' thing. If "clamp" worked on nVidia cards, then only those parts of the scene where the track creator used a negative LOD bias would be impacted. I don't know if "Texture Sharpening" works in a similar fashion.
If "Texture Sharpening" is set to zero, then the correct LOD bias for the various SGSS modes can be applied through Inspector (hence the reason why I'm currently using "-0.5" with 2xSGSS). As an aside, I've come across differing opinions on whether or not recent versions of Inspector take care of LOD bias settings automatically when SGSS is used. One thing is certain, even your GFX setup gets a massive hit with 8xSGSS and would obviously be impossible with mine.
As a result of your tests, I am going to try some different settings now. I became tired of experimenting with each new ISI build/nVidia driver revision and thus stopped awhile back. Never had to do this when I was using AMD cards with rF2 and I still think AMD provides a better image without having to go through all this tinkering (sigh).