Excellent answer from u/toldinstone on a similar question to this, available here.

Especially relevant:

When Roman men began to commission nude statues of themselves, they inherited and imitated the Greek conventions for musculature, bulging rump and all. Most nude statues of Roman men belong to the emperors (nudity was a mark of divinity, among other things); and to judge from that admittedly limited data set, we might infer that Roman men wanted to be seen as perfectly-muscled demigods. This, however, would be misleading. Most Roman men probably wouldn't have objected to being perfectly-muscled demigods. In reality, however, few were so committed to the gymnasium. Bulging muscles were for gladiators and laborers; the gentleman should be fit, not jacked to the gills. Artistic conventions, in short, were not necessarily standards of beauty.

The short answer is no they were not as ripped as sculptures suggest. There was an ideal body form, and this was what sculptures often depict.