As senior web dev and sometimes project manager, i would say it depends on the test but i can for sure tell you accurately that this tests doesn't represent real life problems, at least not at all.
The companies that use this tests systematically are getting people that know the theory very well, people immersed on algorithms that will rarely fit on a real project, this is not the same profile that those who fit in well structured logic for real purposes.
For example if i want to hire people to develop an e-commerce, the test-aware profiles will tend to perform over-engineering on it, making it less maintainable, adding complexity, just because they wasted their time looking at those pretty complex algorithms just because they think it makes them better devs (hey, google exists and there's tones of places where to find this approaches).
If i ask devs to write with their own words how to deal with order-invoice cycle and why, it would be more accurate and I'm getting answers on a real project, then i can figure out which dev fits more (simple but effective logic etc). They are answering things that makes sense like the model and logic behind the specs i set in a paper, which can be prettily a simplified approach i have on the project for what i need to hire people.
In the past i found myself on interviews that was based on a logic test, others that made me deal with a CRUD cycle consuming an API with companies own framework (WTF), others that made me literally an exam on DB queries and algorithms that obviously i never used since i was a student...
Curiously those interviews where on the same companies that are crying on linkedin to hire people and aren't capable to figure out why devs aren't knocking on their door. This was my experience of the last 10-12 years. Get your own conclusions.
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
We strive for transparency and don't collect excess data.