You can check this yourself using this very long link which will give you a list of Hawking's work that has been published in refereed journals, ordered by the number of times they have been cited in other papers (a measure of how influential they are on other scientists). This is a way of providing at least some non-opinion based answer to this question.
Hawking has written or co-authored about 190 papers (although ~20 of these look like a book in his honour) that have been cited >30,000 times and has an h-index (h of his papers have been cited >h times) of 74. This is an impressive number, though not remarkable. I could name several currently working astrophysicists (though not me!) who could top this number, and you would probably never have heard of them. What are remarkable numbers though are that he first-authored 143 of these papers and his normalised citations (divide by the number of authors) number >24,000.
His most well-cited paper is far and away his 1975 paper on Particle Creation by Black Holes, a.k.a "Hawking radiation" - where he attributes a temperature to black holes and predicts that small black holes will evaporate. His second-most cited paper, from 1974, - Black Hole Explosions? was also in this topic, where he discusses the explosive effects of evaporating low-mass black holes at the ends of their lives.
Another very well-cited paper is work with Gibbons in 1977 to verify that the entropy of a black hole is given by 4 times the area defined by its event horizon. Thus I would argue that his work on black hole thermodynamics in the 70s was his most influential work.
Looking down this list, I have to concede that I do not even follow the abstracts of about half of them; I did come across this curiosity that may amuse. Cited 382 times, from 1984, The Cosmological Constant is Probably Zero. It's a useful word - "probably"!
The above is all factual (and your question risks being closed as inviting opinion-based answers). In my opinion I do not think comparisons with other well-known physicists are fair or valid. It was a different time. You mention Bohr and Dirac. I actually think that both of these had a much wider influence on the direction in which physics has travelled. Hawking's work has not really been in the physics mainstream (nuclear physics, particle physics, solid-state). However, what is unarguable is Hawking's
massive influence (or "public visibility" as you term it) on the public's perception (though possibly not its understanding) of scientists, cosmology and black holes.
And then of course there was his real breakthrough moment...