If you enjoy playing the bots, go for it. But if you're trying to improve it's better to play humans.
Bots don't make the typical mistakes that human players do: you can't outplay a bot and they don't fall for tricks. Instead they play perfect moves most of the time, depending on their rating, with an occasional blunder mixed in at random moments. The game you shared provided a perfect example. The game was decided by 8. h4, a move so random that it's played only once for each 7,000 (roughly) the position was played. That doesn't mean you didn't play well, you did. But it's not a normal game evolvement.
When you play bots, you need to avoid mistakes and simply wait for the bot to mess up. Against humans on the other hand, you can outplay them, put them under pressure, sacrifice material to weaken their King's safety, etc. Against human players you get much better feedback of the practical strength of your moves.
Based on your puzzle rating and puzzle rush scores you should have a higher rapid rating if you played more games. Puzzle ratings aren't the only indicator of a player's strength, but the gap is too big. Most players have a rapid rating that's 1000 lower than their puzzle rating (plus or minus a few hundred). That means you can improve.
I'm a poor rated player (~700 - but I think that's actually a bit overstated as I rarely beat other 700 rated players), recently I've been playing progressively through the bots to see where I get to. I've only been moving on to the next bot up if I beat one four times in a row, two as white and two as black. It seems that I've met my match at Arthur, I think I'm currently at 8-8 with him. Below is what I consider to be my best game, won with a 94% accuracy, however there are plenty of times when I get into trouble in the opening - typically a Sicilian variation that the Arthur bot plays.