AFAIK there is no difference at the hypervisor. They both use the same hypervisor for virtualization (KVM). The key difference is that RHEV has two part RHEV-H and RHEV-M. RHEV-H is a specialized RHEL product with kvm hypervisor to run the guests. RHEV-M is the management interface for managing RHEV-H nodes. AFAIK you can manage RHEL based systems too so there shouldn't be too much difference beetween the systems. I think they use libvirt for managing nodes so with CentOS you can use libvirt (with python binding for example) as well to manage multiple nodes(there are some projects what using it). I've found few months ago an article about the RHEV-M that it will be open sourced (now it's closed and runs only on windows).
(I hope that when it will be open source it will be included in RHEL so we can use it under CentOS, but i think that CentOS developers will include it
If you want to have a good management interface, you have windows servers where you can install it, and you can purchase it i suggest you to buy the licenses because what i've seen from it it's very good. Easy to use, and easier to manage multiple hypervisors (and there are lot other advantages).
If you don't need support, and the management interface, and you don't have money to pay the subscription CentOS is a better choice (because you get the same hypervisor).
I hope that this helped you a little and i haven't missed too much
2010/11/12 Nataraj <email@example.com>
What are the differences between the Redhat virtualization product and
the kvm virtualization that is currently included with Redhat/CentOS?
If I don't want to run the standalone hypervisor or the windows based
management interface (Is this worth considering?), are there any
advantages to the virtualization product over running kvm on CentOS? *It
is my understanding that the windows management will at some point run
under linux. *Other than the current kvm, will the Redhat virtualization
product be part of CentOS in any way?
CentOS mailing list
CentOS mailing list