It's been my experience that similar priced products within a brand (similar priced integrated vs receiver) will sound about the same. A new $500 Yamaha Receiver and a new $500 Yamaha integrated, even with different s/n ratios, etc, probably will not make one think one is superior sounding. If companies save $50 by not adding a tuner or processor, I would not expect $50 in better components in the integrated. If one does a major price increase step in one or the other, then you may start to hear a difference. Again, just my experience from many years. I am assuming 2 similar aged components (same era) from same brand. Comparing two brands does not work since each one has a general "house sound". If you prefer the house sound of Marantz, then you may like a $500 marantz receiver over a $2000 Yamaha integrated.
Do Integrateds sound better than Receivers?
I have a Rotel reciever as amplification for my system, but would like to upgrade to an integrated amp. One reason for this is that I don't listen to my radio. But the other reason is that I've been lead to believe that an integrated amp will sound better than a receiver. Is this necessarily so? How might having a tuner in the same chassis affect the sound quality of the amp? For example, would a Rotel integrated amp sound better than a Rotel receiver?