Well, we are at the end.
Speaking about performances, it seems that the faster controller levels out many of the differences recorded in the previous benchmark run (the one with PERC H200 controller). EXT4 and XFS often performs the same or are within striking distance.
One notable exception is PostgreSQL: in at least one benchmark (pgbench) EXT4 shows a very strong win. So, if you plan to heavily use a PostgreSQL database, use EXT4 filesystem.
On the other hand, if you plan to use very big files and/or direct file I/O, XFS seems slightly better overall.
On all other cases, I think that the choice between EXT4 and XFS is largely indifferent, but EXT4 has a “black spot” that can not be ignored: when paired with this filesystem, Bonnie++ was able to bring down (multiple times) the entire machine. While EXT4 don't show any problem with the other tests, the Bonnie++ behavior is a very bad thing.
Also remember that EXT4 is currently officially limited to a maximum of 16 TiB (~17.5 TB) per volume: if you need a bigger volume, you had to go with XFS.