The Su-33 has a 30,000 kgs max take-off weight from a carrier(from janes). It's empty weight is around 18000kgs. A mig-29k's empty weight is around 12700-13000kgs. It's max take off is 24,500. It's max takeoff from a carrier is only said to be sightly lower than the Max take-off.
The Su-33 is superior to the Mig-29k. In terms of payload, and range, Su-33 is marginally better. In terms of Avionics and hardpoints, it will be clearly and undisputably better IF the Su-33 were upgraded. In landing, their landing speeds will be about the same because of canards on the Su-33 making it almost immune to high AoA problems which happens at low speeds.
We will be operating a medium sized carrier, so don't imagine Mig-29k to be better than Su-33. It is not. Even Thrust to weight ratio if both the planes are loaded equally, will go for the Su-33. Being a die hard fulcrum fan, it is hard to accept this.
But the consolation is, it is only slightly better than the Mig-29k. Given the fact that we can fit in more number of Mig-29 inside a carrier than a Su-33, it levels out the playing field, or even maybe it's even advantage fulcrum. Size and numbers does matter.
A carrier is not a airfield when adding additional bunkers will suffice. The space available inside a carrier is constant and cannot be extended by addition of additional bunkers like in Land based fighters.
Ofcourse all this is only for Su-33. Only God knows what kind of fighter the chinese(who prefer self-sufficiency than quality) are making.
BTW, Landing speeds of Mig-29/Su-33 generally range from 260-330 km/hr(1 knot = 1.85 km/hr). 260 is landing in a clean configuration with minimal fuel, and 330 for maximum bring in load. Any higher, I mean just imagine stopping a 20000 Kilogram plane traveling at 330km/hr(or if you can't imagine that, imagine your car which is traveling at 300kms and brought to a stop suddenly). The stresses and G forces will be f()cking enormous. Higher than 330 is possible, but the plane's airframe won't last long.