CentOS vs. Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)

Now that CentOS Linux is end of life, many are reconsidering whether a RHEL subscription makes sense or if there are alternatives that offer the security and stability of RHEL without the price tag. 

In this blog, we'll compare CentOS vs. RHEL from the lens of an organization considering migrating from EOL CentOS to a commercial distribution instead of an open source Linux distro like Rocky Linux or AlmaLinux. 

CentOS vs. Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)

The main difference between CentOS vs. Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is that CentOS is a community-developed, free alternative to Red Hat, which is a commercial solution requiring a paid subscription. CentOS and Red Hat are virtually identical in terms of functionality because they share the exact same source code. However, as of June 2024, all versions of CentOS are EOL, meaning there are no more security updates or future releases planned.

CentOS vs. RHEL Comparison Matrix

Use this comparison chart to see how CentOS and RHEL stack up on over 15 different factors, including licensing, security, package management, and available commercial support.

CentOS vs. RHEL

Not Ready to Migrate Off CentOS 7? 

Migrations take time and careful planning. With OpenLogic long-term support, you can stay on CentOS 7 and meet compliance requirements through 2029. We also offer migration services, from planning to execution. 

Explore CentOS Support

CentOS vs. RHEL Cost

CentOS was free, no matter how many systems you installed or how many cores those systems had.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), on the other hand, can vary between $99/year per installation (RHEL Developer Suite – Self-support) and $18,000/year per installation (RHEL for IBM System Z – Premium Support). There are developer subscriptions that are free but are for development only (self-support).

CentOS vs. RHEL Packages

CentOS was built from the same source code as RHEL, meaning:

• The upstream packages are the same.
• The libraries are the same.
• The kernels are the same.
• Both systems are binary compatible with each other.

The RHEL source code was once published and freely available, but that changed in 2023 as part of Red Hat's shift to focus on CentOS Stream. Now you need a RHEL subscription to access the source code.

CentOS vs. RHEL Lifecycle

The lifecycle of CentOS was identical to that of RHEL, except in the case of CentOS 8 which was discontinued prematurely in 2021 (vs. RHEL 8, which will get updates through 2029).

CentOS vs. RHEL Branding

Branding is the major difference between RHEL and CentOS. Much of the work done for a CentOS release involved removing the Red Hat licensing, branding, and URLs from the source code and replacing them with the CentOS equivalents.

CentOS vs. RHEL Licensing

Both RHEL and CentOS licensing is primarily GNU GPL with some other FOSS licenses. But RHEL adds paid, commercial licensing for the end-user.

One of the benefits of some of RHEL’s commercial licensing options is support. All RHEL installations can be “self-supported”, which means the system administrator has access to software updates and web-based content (articles, knowledgebase, etc), but no direct support from Red Hat.

Other support subscription options include standard (8x5) and premium (24x7) support, which includes direct phone and online support avenues. Red Hat also offers extended support which provides support for RHEL versions which have exceeded their normal support lifecycle.

RHEL also promotes add-ons. Many of the RHEL add-ons are the same open source solutions that you could have deployed on CentOS but are bundled with support and may include some RHEL-customized or proprietary configurations and utilities like centralized system management, high availability, and clustered file systems.

CentOS vs. RHEL Support

CentOS had no paid support options available directly via the CentOS maintainers, and the price (free) reflected that.

CentOS, like many open source projects, was supported by its community, bringing the knowledge and experience of thousands of die-hard CentOS (and RHEL) users together for the greater good. However, the downsides of community support are that you don’t have anyone to directly contact and there are no guaranteed response time or SLAs.

This is why third parties like OpenLogic offered CentOS support (and now offer long-term support, or LTS). Many companies feel more confident deploying free open source technologies when they can get commercial-grade technical support when they need it. OpenLogic supports more than 400 technologies, giving enterprises a single point of contact for all OSS software support requirements.

CentOS vs. RHEL Systems

CentOS did not come in “flavors” as RHEL does.

Red Hat offers variations of desktop, workstation, developer, and server installations, as well as virtual host/guest options. The included software, add-ons, and typical support level are different for each one.  

CentOS offered LiveCD ISOs which is something that RHEL does not do, even though their mutual ancestor, Fedora, does. LiveCDs are bootable CDs/DVDs and are great for rescuing a misconfigured/damaged system or for testing things out without the need to install the OS onto a hard disk. 

To access the RHEL software repositories, you have to have a current, active RHEL subscription. Thus, if your subscription lapses, you can no longer obtain package updates or install new software. The CentOS software repositories are public, do not require a subscription or login credentials, and are mirrored at many locations around the world.  

Speaking of repositories, there is a repo difference that some consider important. RHEL publishes metadata about packages that describe the security issue or bug report addressed by the updates. This can be useful if you wish to only apply security-related updates or to limit the updates installed to only those that address a particular open source vulnerability. 

This information is not published by CentOS. It is available through third parties. Of course, you can perform these steps manually, also. But if you keep all of the packages installed on your systems up to date, you’re going to have all of the available security patches and bug fixes installed on your system anyway.

CentOS vs. RHEL Release Cadence

With RHEL, it is possible to test out release candidates a few months before the full GA (General Availability) release. While running your production systems on a beta release is not a good practice, early testing of your applications on the release candidate in a lab environment can alert you to possible issues sooner.

CentOS did not make beta releases available but offered a CR (continuous release) repository that was populated with the packages that made up the next point release. The CR repo was generally available for a couple of weeks before the GA release.

The CentOS 7 releases were publicly available about 2–4 weeks after the equivalent RHEL release. Ongoing package updates were released very shortly after the RHEL updates. 

With EL 8, the entire CentOS build system had to be reconstructed, adding quite a bit more initial delay. CentOS 8.0, for instance, released about 4 months after RHEL 8.0. CentOS 8.1, though, was released about 2 months after RHEL 8.1. This has increased the delay for package updates a bit.

Download the Decision Maker's Guide to Enterprise Linux

Explore the top Linux distributions for enterprise in our recently updated guide. Includes in-depth comparisons of stalwart commercial options like RHEL and free distros like Rocky Linux and AlmaLinux.

📘 Get the White Paper

Final Thoughts

Each company has different requirements around their operating system and the type and level of support they need — and so does every customer. It's important to take into account your in-house talent pool. Do you have an experienced team at your disposal to handle outages and other issues when they arise? The answer to that question should help you determine how much you need to invest in your mission-critical OS infrastructure.  

If you can self-support, one of the community-developed CentOS alternatives may makes more sense than paying for RHEL. If you’re mostly self-sufficient but need some “insurance”, or you want to outsource the bulk of your support, a support contract with OpenLogic may be the best option. OpenLogic also now offers hardened Linux images for VMs and containers to help you build from a secure, tested baseline.   

If you’re locked into RHEL or have other business needs that make RHEL the only viable option, the choice is simple. But if you are not, support contracts for open source Enterprise Linux typically save OpenLogic customers more than 50% compared to RHEL.

Need Enterprise Linux Guidance? 

Talk to an OpenLogic Enterprise Architect today to learn how we can help you migrate to a supported Linux distribution that works for your organization. We'll review your environment and make unbiased recommendations. 

Talk to a Linux Expert

Related Content:

• Solution - Hardened Linux Images
• Blog - How to Plan a Successful Linux Migration
• Blog - Rocky Linux vs. RHEL
• Blog - How to Choose the Best Linux Distro for Your Organization
• Blog - Top Enterprise Linux Distributions from the State of Open Source Report
• Blog - Setting a CentOS Migration Strategy
• Guide - Navigating CentOS End of Life
• Whitepaper - Decision Maker's Guide to Enterprise Linux