What is the difference between lock, mutex and semaphore?

A lock allows only one thread to enter the part that's locked and the lock is not shared with any other processes.

A mutex is the same as a lock but it can be system wide (shared by multiple processes).

A semaphore does the same as a mutex but allows x number of threads to enter, this can be used for example to limit the number of cpu, io or ram intensive tasks running at the same time.

For a more detailed post about the differences between mutex and semaphore read here.

You also have read/write locks that allows either unlimited number of readers or 1 writer at any given time.

I will try to cover it with examples:

Lock: One example where you would use lock would be a shared dictionary into which items (that must have unique keys) are added.
The lock would ensure that one thread does not enter the mechanism of code that is checking for item being in dictionary while another thread (that is in the critical section) already has passed this check and is adding the item. If another thread tries to enter a locked code, it will wait (be blocked) until the object is released.

private static readonly Object obj = new Object();

lock (obj) //after object is locked no thread can come in and insert item into dictionary on a different thread right before other thread passed the check...
{
    if (!sharedDict.ContainsKey(key))
    {
        sharedDict.Add(item);
    }
}

Semaphore: Let's say you have a pool of connections, then an single thread might reserve one element in the pool by waiting for the semaphore to get a connection. It then uses the connection and when work is done releases the connection by releasing the semaphore.

Code example that I love is one of bouncer given by @Patric - here it goes:

using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Text;
using System.Threading;

namespace TheNightclub
{
    public class Program
    {
        public static Semaphore Bouncer { get; set; }

        public static void Main(string[] args)
        {
            // Create the semaphore with 3 slots, where 3 are available.
            Bouncer = new Semaphore(3, 3);

            // Open the nightclub.
            OpenNightclub();
        }

        public static void OpenNightclub()
        {
            for (int i = 1; i <= 50; i++)
            {
                // Let each guest enter on an own thread.
                Thread thread = new Thread(new ParameterizedThreadStart(Guest));
                thread.Start(i);
            }
        }

        public static void Guest(object args)
        {
            // Wait to enter the nightclub (a semaphore to be released).
            Console.WriteLine("Guest {0} is waiting to entering nightclub.", args);
            Bouncer.WaitOne();          

            // Do some dancing.
            Console.WriteLine("Guest {0} is doing some dancing.", args);
            Thread.Sleep(500);

            // Let one guest out (release one semaphore).
            Console.WriteLine("Guest {0} is leaving the nightclub.", args);
            Bouncer.Release(1);
        }
    }
}

Mutex It is pretty much Semaphore(1,1) and often used globally (application wide otherwise arguably lock is more appropriate). One would use global Mutex when deleting node from a globally accessible list (last thing you want another thread to do something while you are deleting the node). When you acquire Mutex if different thread tries to acquire the same Mutex it will be put to sleep till SAME thread that acquired the Mutex releases it.

Good example on creating global mutex is by @deepee

class SingleGlobalInstance : IDisposable
{
    public bool hasHandle = false;
    Mutex mutex;

    private void InitMutex()
    {
        string appGuid = ((GuidAttribute)Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly().GetCustomAttributes(typeof(GuidAttribute), false).GetValue(0)).Value.ToString();
        string mutexId = string.Format("Global\\{{{0}}}", appGuid);
        mutex = new Mutex(false, mutexId);

        var allowEveryoneRule = new MutexAccessRule(new SecurityIdentifier(WellKnownSidType.WorldSid, null), MutexRights.FullControl, AccessControlType.Allow);
        var securitySettings = new MutexSecurity();
        securitySettings.AddAccessRule(allowEveryoneRule);
        mutex.SetAccessControl(securitySettings);
    }

    public SingleGlobalInstance(int timeOut)
    {
        InitMutex();
        try
        {
            if(timeOut < 0)
                hasHandle = mutex.WaitOne(Timeout.Infinite, false);
            else
                hasHandle = mutex.WaitOne(timeOut, false);

            if (hasHandle == false)
                throw new TimeoutException("Timeout waiting for exclusive access on SingleInstance");
        }
        catch (AbandonedMutexException)
        {
            hasHandle = true;
        }
    }


    public void Dispose()
    {
        if (mutex != null)
        {
            if (hasHandle)
                mutex.ReleaseMutex();
            mutex.Dispose();
        }
    }
}

then use like:

using (new SingleGlobalInstance(1000)) //1000ms timeout on global lock
{
    //Only 1 of these runs at a time
    GlobalNodeList.Remove(node)
}

Hope this saves you some time.

lock, mutex, semaphore

It is a general vision. Details are depended on real language realisation

lock - thread synchronization tool. When thread get a lock it becomes a single thread which is able to execute a block of code. All others thread are blocked. Only thread which owns the lock can unlock it

mutex - mutual exclusion lock. It is a kind of lock. On some languages it is inter-process mechanism, on some languages it is a synonym of lock. For example Java uses lock in synchronised and java.util.concurrent.locks.Lock

semaphore - allows a number of threads to access a shared resource. You can find that mutex also can be implemented by semaphore. It is a standalone object which manage an access to shared resource. You can find that any thread can signal and unblock. Also it is used for signalling

[iOS lock, mutex, semaphore]

Supporting ownership, maximum number of processes share lock and the maximum number of allowed processes/threads in critical section are three major factors that determine the name/type of the concurrent object with general name of lock. Since the value of these factors are binary (have two states), we can summarize them in a 3*8 truth-like table.

• X (Supports Ownership?): no(0) / yes(1)
• Y (#sharing processes): > 1 (∞) / 1
• Z (#processes/threads in CA): > 1 (∞) / 1

  X   Y   Z          Name
 --- --- --- ------------------------
  0   ∞   ∞   Semaphore              
  0   ∞   1   Binary Semaphore       
  0   1   ∞   SemaphoreSlim          
  0   1   1   Binary SemaphoreSlim(?)
  1   ∞   ∞   Recursive-Mutex(?)     
  1   ∞   1   Mutex                  
  1   1   ∞   N/A(?)                 
  1   1   1   Lock/Monitor           

Feel free to edit or expand this table, I've posted it as an ascii table to be editable:)