How accurate is the chess.com computer ratings

When i play the 1600 bot, how accurate is that 1600 rating?  Ive been consistently beating the level 12 computer and all the other bots rated (1600) with both colors, but the computer often loses to moves which i would think someone rated 800 would see coming, especially because no time control. Like one or 2 moves sequences with an obvious threat or it';ll just sac a pawn for no reason. I know I'm getting better, but it kinda feels like the there is a little bit of vanity rating going on to give me an ego boost.  I dont want an ego boost. Give it to me raw chess.com.

Or is the issue making a 1600 bot is challenging because of how 1600players play.

The difficulty depends on the time control that you give yourself to beat the bots. If you play it like a classical game, the bots will seem overrated. Conversely, if you play at bullet speed, the bots will seem underrated. 

Since the games against the bots are untimed, it is difficult to judge the time control at which the bot is meant to play at the level of its given rating. If I had to give a guess, I'd say it is 3+0. So, if you'd like a better estimate of your chess.com blitz rating by only playing bots, I'd recommend playing games with the bot with about 3 seconds per move 

a bit late hehe but similar doubt. I'm a really weak and inconsistent player, so that might be good of the reason this happens (or at leat I think it does. a 1100 is the one I played the most 'cause similar to Polgar's play - allegedly - and one or both of these two things: it makes deliberate bad moves when I blunder or its agressive style really takes advantage of most of my blunders; it's accuracy seems to adjusted after each game. oh, there's also a major thing: its accuracy is 30-50 tops against me (really weak, inconsistent player, still committ really ridiculous blunders), so maybe it just plays well enough to beat or even adjust to a lower rated players after I play awfully against it hehe