They are identical. You should just call new ConcurrentHashMap and forget about Maps.newConcurrentHashMap.
Over a decade ago at this point, the <> were optional when invoking static methods but they weren't when invoking constructors. var also didn't exist yet. Thus, the only way to write the code "Make a field or variable for a Map object, and create a new Map object, and assign the reference to this newly made object to the newly made field/variable" which is a rather common thing to do, is:
Map<String, Integer> map = new ConcurrentHashMap<String, Integer>();
That's very wordy and the <String, Integer> part is straight up duplication, which is annoying. That's why google introduced the newConcurrentHashMap method in their guava library, because:
Map<String, Integer> map = Maps.newConcurrentHashMap();
is shorter, and you can static-import that method for the even shorter:
Map<String, Integer> map = newConcurrentHashMap();
That was the only point of all this: Shorter code. It does the same thing. These days, for local vars you can write:
var map = new ConcurrentHashMap<String, Integer>();
and for fields you can use the diamond syntax:
Map<String, Integer> map = new ConcurrentHashMap<>();
Hence, google's newXYZ methods are obsolete.