This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Why Are Semiconductor Price Indexes Falling So Fast?: Industry Estimates and Implications for Productivity Measurement

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Ana Aizcorbe (Bureau of Economic Analysis)

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

By any measure, price deflators for semiconductors fell at a staggering pace over much of the last decade, pulled down by steep declines in the deflator for the microprocessor (MPU) segment. These rapid price declines are typically attributed to technological innovations that lower constant-quality manufacturing costs through either increases in the quality of the devices or decreases in costs. However, Intel’s dominance in the microprocessor market raises the possibility that those price declines could also reflect changes in Intel’s profit margins. This paper uses industry estimates on Intel’s operations to decompose a price index for Intel’s MPUs into three components: quality improvements, reductions in costs, and changes in markups. The decomposition suggests that 1) virtually all of the declines in a price index for Intel’s chips can be attributed to quality increases associated with product innovation, rather than declines in the cost per chip. Of course, these increases in quality pushed down constant-quality costs. However, cost per chip did not play a role in generating the observed price declines in the MPU price index, as cost increases associated with the introduction of new, higher quality chips more than offset cost reductions associated with learning economies. With regard to markups, the sizable decline in Intel's markups from 1993-99 only accounted for about 6 percentage points of the average 24 percent decline per quarter in a price index for Intel’s chips. Consistent with the inflection point that Jorgenson(2000) noted in the overall price index for semiconductors, the Intel price index falls faster after 1995 than in the earlier period but, again, the decomposition attributes virtually all of the inflection point to an acceleration in quality increases.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.bea.gov/bea/papers/semiconductorprices.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Bureau of Economic Analysis in its series BEA Working Papers with number 0026.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 2005
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:bea:wpaper:0026

Contact details of provider:
Email:
Web page: http://www.bea.gov
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Ana Aizcorbe).

Related research
Keywords:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Feenstra, R.C., 1995. "Exact Hedonic Price Indexes," Department of Economics 95-11, California Davis - Department of Economics.
    Other versions:
  2. Basu, Susanto & Fernald, John G, 1997. "Returns to Scale in U.S. Production: Estimates and Implications," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(2), pages 249-83, April.
    Other versions:
  3. Mick Silver & Saeed Heravi, 2002. "A Failure in the measurement of inflation: results from a hedonic and matched experiment using scanner data," Working Paper Series 144, European Central Bank. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  4. Stephen D. Oliner & Daniel E. Sichel, 2002. "Information technology and productivity: where are we now and where are we going?," Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, issue Q3, pages 15-44. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  5. Dale W. Jorgenson & Kevin J. Stiroh, 2000. "Raising the Speed Limit: US Economic Growth in the Information Age," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 261, OECD, Economics Department. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  6. Charles R. Hulten, 1997. "Quality change in the CPI," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, issue May, pages 87-100. [Downloadable!]
  7. Mark Bils & Peter J. Klenow, 2000. "Quantifying Quality Growth," NBER Working Papers 7695, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  8. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521556231 is not listed on IDEAS
  9. Irwin, Douglas A & Klenow, Peter J, 1994. "Learning-by-Doing Spillovers in the Semiconductor Industry," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(6), pages 1200-1227, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  10. Berry, Steven & Levinsohn, James & Pakes, Ariel, 1995. "Automobile Prices in Market Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(4), pages 841-90, July. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? A few items listed on IDEAS are over 2000 years old!

This page was last updated on 2009-12-2.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.