No, it doesn't give the results that people want.
How do I know?
Germany.
In Germany they vote FPTP and PR on the same day, at the same time, and get two very, VERY different results.
en.wikipedia.org
This is the 2017 Federal Election (which costs less than a US senate seat election, yes, one seat)
Here are the FPTP results based on number of seats won.
CDU/CSU 231
SPD 59
AfD 3
Die Linke 5
The Greens 1
So, you'd think the CDU/CSU with 77% of the seats would have got 77% of the votes.
Nope, they got 37.27% of the votes.
The SPD got 24.65%, but only got 19.7% of the seats
The AfD got 11.46% but only 1% of the seats
The Greens got 8% and 0.3% of the seats
The FDP got 7% and 0% of the seats.
So why did it happen?
Because with FPTP you only need to win more votes than someone else in your constituency.
So, imagine two constituencies. You win you constituency with 24.5% of the vote (happened in South Belfast in 2015 in the UK) and then your opponent wins theirs with 80% of the vote. Means they got way more votes but still get the same seat.
But Germany does PR and PR trumps FPTP.
So the CDU/CSU ended up with 246 seats out of 709 seats, or 34.7% of the seats.
Much fairer, they actually got LESS votes with PR because people feel they can vote smaller parties.
The FDP who got ZERO seats with FPTP got 80 seats with PR.
What the people wanted is based on PR, what the US gets is based on FPTP which is complete bullshit.