The PZ IVG I'm talking about is the earlier version with the 50+30 armor.
I did a simulation of 3 vs 3 tanks at about 480m for T-34/76 M'43 and the 4G takes it 4 times to 1. Then vs the T-34/76e M'42 and the 4G wins only 1 times to 4. Then vs the T-34/57 M'41 and the 4G wins 4 to 0 with one tie.
There are a couple of issues in relation to this.
firstly this is a combat match up at ideal ranges for the L48 weapon against the T-34. It would be interesting to see what happens at lesser and greater ranges, though I doubt at any range, the T-34 in a stand up fight would get the advantage. this was the MkIVs forte....winning firefights in non-mobile battles, or at best, where their mobility was not affected by poor weather or rough terrain. The problem is after the summer of 1942, this was a situation they seldom were given by the Soviets
Secondly, and following on from the above, I don't think there can be a serious contention that the T-34 was better than the G (much less a H or panther) in a combat situation, In a gunfight the Mk IV will generally win, but gun power is simply not the only issue. its a big issue, but I would say not even the dominant issue. This was because of the nature of combat the Soviets preferred, and from Stalingrad on (with the exception of Kursk and one or two other incidents) they increasingly dictated the terms of battle on the Eastern Front) After Kursk, once the Russians had won the initiative, they seldom bothered to stop and duke it out with the few German tanks that might be there to oppose their break throughs. There were reasons why the Soviets referred to their T-34s as a Breakthrough tank, and the dominant type of battle when on the offensive as the breakthrough, or exploitation battle. Basically flatten, or suppress a section of the front with artillery and airpower, Use a mixed force of tanks and Infantry to smash a hole through that sector. Heavy losses likely at this point as the germans will be able to use their firepower advantages to full effect. but once the breach is made, bring up reserves to firstly restore the integrity of the assault forces, which now switch to holding open the breach, and secondly, a second reserve force....the breakthrough groups, to push as far and as deep as they can, exploiting the phenomenal mobility and endurance that were the hallmark of Russian mechanised formations. Soviet T-34s, with their long range fuel tanks were a centrpiece of those formations and operations.
Once the breakthrough phase was reached, and put into effect, German losses would begin to mount. The majority of German tank losses on the eastern front were not directly combat related. the majority were things like "ran out of fuel; abandoned" or "broke down - destroyed by crew" . In battle, the Soviets sustained losses of around 7:1 in favour of the Germans, but overall the loss ratio was much closer to 2:1 which is a very favourable result for a technically inferior force on the attack. Manpower wise the Germans lost more men on the eastern front 1944-5 than the Soviets, and that was because of the types of battles they were forced to fight. The best example of this type of warfare is perhaps the destruction of Army Group Centre
So, if we look at the whole package, the question of which tank is supoerior become s much harder to determine. if we throw in unit costs, it becomes much more weighted in favour of the T-34.