I'd say the cardinal example here would be [The Persians](https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Four_Plays_of_Aeschylus_(Cookson)/The_Persians) by Aiskhylos. This is the work notoriously (and maybe unfairly) cited by Edward Said as an "ur-example" of the phenomenon of "Orientalism". I don't think we should project our contemporary or early modern attitudes on the Ancient Greeks, but it should give you an idea. The work is about Xerxes' invasion of Greece, exaggerating the defeat at Salamis into an absolute catastrophe. It focuses on the Queen Mother, Atosa, who awaits news of Xerxes' invasion in the palace at Susa, expressing great woe on the news of his defeat (in fact, her woe is so great it brings the ghost of Dareios back from the grave). Xerxes is portrayed as pitiful and effete, dissapointing his strong-willed mother and failing his father.

As you note, Herodotos is reasonably even-handed, but some of his accounts are clearly biased - the one that occurs to me is the assertion that the aged Spartiates at Thermopylai were supposedly running circles around the royal guard of the Persians in terms of skilfulness. In the work of Ctesias, which survives only in fragments, as well as in later Hellenistic works, such as those of Plutarch and Diodoros, we find a preoccupation with quaint tales of court intrigue featuring decadence, subterfuge and hubris, and relatively little concern with the fact that Persia was a polity.

There are many assessments one could make of this legacy; one I tend to favour is that the Achaemenid Empire was to both Classical and Hellenic authors integral to their perception of both the perils and virtues of monarchy, and in essense the ultimate, even defining example of such a state. Nobody could deny the wealth, power and splendor of the vast empire, but this was more than counteracted with cautionary tales of hubris, decadence, and sexual immorality (such as full-sibling marriage, or in the case of Artaxerxes II, marriage to one's children). It's a really complicated topic!