Of course i prefer QR since a sole rook is enough to force mate. However even in an even position where i held QR against QN i don't think i would win or win at ease if my opponent was skillful enough. I think QN could bother me much if played by a skillful opponent.
Also R vs N started in an even position is a forced draw.
When i was studying which piece is better in chess bishop or knight, i found many factors involved. one of them was piece cordination which showed queen and knight are better partners than queen and bishop. so i reasearched on that too, i found out that queen + knight is better bc they both can do what each other can't. making them a unique and dangerous combination. however i saw in some places that people wrote the queen and bishop or queen and rook add reducancy in one area for the queen. I understand that but queen and rook can checkmate the king extremly quickly ( ladder mate or kill box mate). queen and knight can do it slower than queen and rook but they can do it with style but isn't chess about how fast u can mate the king? even though Q + N can do some extremly strong and amazing attacks, queen and rook can pin or immobilize the king too. Plus queen + rook vs queen is a win while q + n is usully draw but if the queen is seperated from his king, then its a win, i think but still Q + R vs Q is always winning. My opinion is Q + R is better. whats yours?