Does 1621 rating of mine in tactics mean anything after 13,028 attemps ??

It means you're dedicated.  But as far as what it means ability wise?  Who knows.  My peak tactics rating here was 2700+, but i can guarantee you that my OTB tactic abilities is nowhere near that. 

thank you so much sensei.That's quite encouraging 

It means you're spending an average of about 30s a move. If you slowed down, your rating would be higher.

And that is part of the problem. The tactics ratings here do not measure anything consistent. You're not necessarily better at tactics than someone rated 1400. You might be better than someone rated 1800.

You're welcome.

Never move until you see the solution!

According to my stats, i took about 2+ minutes per puzzles, but the difficulty level for me is also higher , so i need more time.

In my experience, I have never been trained with tactics. No tactic books , motifs etc (X ray attack, etc are seen when i play those puzzles).  My initial puzzle rating in here is approx 2100-2200 when I start playing tactics in about 2-3 years ago. (That tactics level, without tactics training come from playing against computers and studying master games).

I've done 2000 tactic puzzles so far and feel quite dedicated, but nowhere near as you!

What i learned that just doing tactics does not improve my tournament performance. And the score doesn't say much about my abilities. If i really take my time and set up the tactics puzzle on a real board, i could push my score way higher, but i don't see any point in it. I mostly do unrated tactics, where i select the kind of problems that i am most weak at, and improve on those, one theme at a time.

OP if you want to improve at these you should attempt to be accurate i.e. try hard to get every single of the puzzles right, even if it means you have to spend time on them. Otherwise you're just make your hope chess muscle bigger.

sure thanks ,my openings are awful

true

okay i will spend moretime

sure

I have to agree with several comments.

My tactics rating is 2200+.  OTB, my rating is 1700-1800.

But that's not an apples-to-apples comparison.  Games consist of much more than just tactics -- openings, endgames, positional play, and the difference I want to point out here -- the ability to know when tactics exist and when they don't.  In all of these puzzles, you KNOW that a tactic exists.  You just have to FIND it.  When playing a real game, you don't know that at a given position a tactic exists.

So, I consider tactics rating to be "how strong of a player am I if I know a tactic exists in a given position".  Another way to look at it, using the weakest-link-in-the-chain theory, is that if the rest of your game was "perfect" -- your rating would settle right around the rating of the weakest part of your game -- the tactics rating.

Are you doing the tactics problems for sheer enjoyment or to help you improve in chess?  If you're trying to improve, how are you using the Tactics Trainer?

Personally - and I most often do tactics problems at another site but it provides mostly the same sets of information - after I solve a problem (if I failed, I go back and redo it, unrated, until I solve it), I ask myself what Tactical Motifs were needed to solve the problem.  I then look at the listed TAGS and see if I agree or if I miss something.  Then, if it took more than a couple minutes, I ask myself why it took me so long to see the solution - and to see PATTERNS.

I review the two pages listed below of interactive-tactics to make sure I know the PATTERNS involved.  Two great pages of tactics are here. I slowly memorized them all by name, pattern, and moves - as a teacher with an Advance Professional Teaching Certificate, I know that names make things easier and faster to retrieve from memory.  I review them from time-to-time and make sure I'm able to demonstrate them to myself.

https://www.chess.com/article/view/chess-tactics--definitions-and-examples

https://chesstempo.com/tactical-motifs.html

As Martin Weteschnik says in his very excellent Chess Tactics from Scratch, 2^nd Ed. (c.2012) (pp. 16-23):  "Solving tactical puzzles without fully understanding the underlying mechanisms is not the most efficient way to learn. Instead you must first understand the elements of combinations....[the patterns] might look...trivial...but might turn up in complicated situations. Only if you know these simple patterns by heart will you be able to recognize them in very difficult situations. Have you ever lost due to an unforeseen [tactic]? [From such] games,...put the positions on a board and try to figure out why these [tactics] came as surprises.  Don't be satisfied with just being able to pinpoint the exact mistakes. Always try to understand the underlying causes of your defeats. In some sense all defeats are caused by lack of understanding. So the question one must ask oneself after a loss is: What more do I need to understand to improve my chess?”

I'm not sure how much you can read into chess.com Tactics Ratings.  They've changed the algorithm a couple times in the past two years and so you can't judge your progress very easily - and penalizing you some of the points for solving multilple-move problems because the expected time is 7 seconds is just ridiculous.  Nevertheless, you should see some improvement over time if you're trying to improve and not solving them just for fun - which is ok if that's what you're after!

yeah it means your skill is probably somewhere around 1621

That's what makes tactics, and chess, so difficult. I never move until I see the solution. Sometimes it takes 30 seconds, sometimes it takes 5 minutes, but eventually I see it. I never move until I'm 100% certain of the solution, no matter how long it takes. But even at 100% certainty, I'm still only right a little over half the time.

TITLE IS SPELLED WRONG ALERT TITLE IS SPELLED WRONG

You are dedicated.