Sometimes a long answer isn't particularly needed:

When Charles I died it was a more or less totally isolated event. It affected England. France, Sweden, Austria, Spain, or whatever other major or semi-major European power did not notice or care if they did notice as they were one dealing with the repercussions of the 30 Years' War (where, in some places, over 50% of the population would be killed) and two pretty separated from the consequences of the action.

I don't want to get on the bad side of the Englishmen on the sub but the fact is pretty simple: the execution of Charles I only really mattered to England. The "why" has a relatively simple answer as well and that's that their revolution didn't bother anyone else in a real way. Their civil war was restricted to Britain and Ireland.

The French Revolution was a totally different beast. The French people did not just lop the head off of some guy in a funny hat and say they were a democracy; they formed the first mass conscript army in human history to match that and then used it. It is a myth that Europe declared war on France to 'quell democracy' or some other malarkey; yes they had a goal of reinstating Louis XVI for stability before his execution and before the war started they made some vague threats about how they wanted his well being secured but we must remember that France was who declared war on everyone else first and before executing Louis.

So she not only killed her king but she now had hundreds of thousands of men, some estimates over a million men once it really kicked into gear, and she was using them to invade Austria and the entire Holy Roman Empire, Prussia and later Holland, Spain, Italian states, and friends. And she was, despite some early issues, absolutely overwhelming her enemies on every front. It's absolutely bonkers to say the least but it's what happened; France's enormous conscript army 'spread the revolution' into neighboring states and just shit on the professional small armies of her opponents.

Through these chain of wars that would follow the modern world would be born. West Germany would be simplified from hundreds of small states, some only a few acres and owned by some no-name knight, into the hands of a few princes and dukes. This gave more centralized control over the states and allowed a more sophisticated system of governance, William Carr would argue in The Wars of German Unification, that would help lead to more widespread pan-German unification nationalist thought. To put in his words:

On the right bank of the Rhine all but three of eighty-one ecclesiastical principalities were secularized. Only six of fifty-one imperial cities survived; and the imperial knights were mediatized, ie. their territories -- often not more than a few square miles in extent -- were placed under the jurisdiction of larger neighbors. Overnight, 112 states disappeared in this gigantic rationalization exercise. The principal beneficiaries were Baden, Bavaria, Wurttemberg, and Hesse-Darmstadt.

As the German people were consolidated under a select few major Germanic states (Prussia, Bavaria, Wurttemberg, and Saxony would be the quasi-independent states under the Federal German Reich) another major factor that would lead to German unification occurred -- the Holy Roman Empire would be dismantled as a result of this war. This centuries old institution would just disappear overnight.

Honestly I'm just starting to list off reasons but I think you're starting to get my point: The English Civil War mattered for England but didn't particularly affect anyone else. The French Revolution created conscript armies, caused Europe-wide wars for that would last for 20 years and kill millions, is directly linked with the rise and eventual unification of Germany and the fall of the Holy Roman Empire, the unification of Italy, so on and so on and so on.