UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM N-CSR

CERTIFIED SHAREHOLDER REPORT OF REGISTERED
MANAGEMENT INVESTMENT COMPANIES

Investment Company Act File Number: 811-09995

T. Rowe Price Global Technology Fund, Inc.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in charter)

100 East Pratt Street, Baltimore, MD 21202

(Address of principal executive offices)

David Oestreicher

100 East Pratt Street, Baltimore, MD 21202

(Name and address of agent for service)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (410) 345-2000

Date of fiscal year end: December 31

Date of reporting period: December 31, 2014

The views and opinions in this report were current as of December 31, 2014. They are not guarantees of performance or investment results and should not be taken as investment advice. Investment decisions reflect a variety of factors, and the managers reserve the right to change their views about individual stocks, sectors, and the markets at any time. As a result, the views expressed should not be relied upon as a forecast of the fund’s future investment intent. The report is certified under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which requires mutual funds and other public companies to affirm that, to the best of their knowledge, the information in their financial reports is fairly and accurately stated in all material respects.

Sign up for our E-mail Program, and you can begin to receive updated fund reports and prospectuses online rather than through the mail. Log in to your account at troweprice.com for more information.

Global technology stocks offered good returns in 2014, and we are pleased to report that our fund fared even better. The technology sector proved highly volatile, however, as global economic and political concerns periodically led investors to question the valuations afforded leading companies. These pullbacks largely worked to our advantage, as we were able to strengthen our focus on the firms best positioned to dominate new markets or use technology to take market share in existing ones. We anticipate that our high level of trading this year will prove anomalous, however, and we leave the year somewhat more comfortable with valuations for many of our leading positions.

Our fund recorded a gain of 6.51% in the second half of its fiscal year, bringing its full-year return to a robust 23.99%. The fund’s returns easily outpaced those of the MSCI All Country World Index Information Technology and the Lipper Global Science/Technology Funds Index over our fiscal year. We are pleased to note that the fund’s strong performance helped it rank first among its peers over all major longer-term time periods ended December 31, 2014. Based on cumulative total return, Lipper ranked the Global Technology Fund 8 of 46, 1 of 41, 1 of 39, and 1 of 19 global science/technology funds for the 1-, 3-, 5-, and 10-year periods ended December 31, 2014, respectively. (Results will vary for other periods. Past performance cannot guarantee future results.)

Global stocks recorded decent gains over the second half of our fiscal year, but this was largely due to strong performance in the U.S. Overseas markets faltered as Europe teetered on the brink of recession, China slowed more than expected, and a hike in the Japanese consumption tax appeared to derail that nation’s recovery, at least temporarily. A sharp decline in other currencies versus the U.S. dollar also weighed on overseas returns for U.S. investors. Almost alone among major markets, the U.S. economy appeared to gain momentum throughout at least the early fall, and corporate profits expanded at an even faster pace. Even as U.S. markets advanced, however, they grew considerably more volatile. The sharp rise in the dollar, a tumble in oil prices, and other factors kept investors on edge toward the end of the year.

Defying many who had worried about valuations at the start of the year, global technology stocks fared better than the overall market in 2014. Tech outperformed all other global sectors over the past six months (according to MSCI) and trailed only health care shares for the year as a whole. Performance among individual tech shares varied widely, however. As investors grew more averse to risk, many of them favored large and established U.S. tech companies with abundant corporate cash hoards and a history of paying dividends. Industry giant Apple was particularly strong, which played a key role in boosting both the technology and broader indexes. Some faster-growing, younger companies also fared well, but others saw their shares remain well below the levels they had reached before the brief sell-off in the spring. Globally, hardware, software, and semiconductor stocks fared best over the past six months, while telecom shares lagged. (Please refer to the fund’s portfolio of investments for a complete list of holdings and the amount each represents in the portfolio.)

As our longer-term shareholders know, the central focus of our approach is on companies that are using technology either to exploit new markets, such as social networking, or to seize market share in established industries. Positive developments in both of these areas continued to drive good results for the fund in the second half of our fiscal year. In the former category, our top contributor to overall results was Chinese Internet search giant Baidu, which continued to enjoy the double benefit of exploiting a new market in a newly developing economy. In the latter category, we continued to see some very good results from cloud-based “software as a service” providers Proofpoint, NetSuite, and salesforce.com, which are taking share from traditional, on-site software providers. We also benefited as one of these traditional firms, SAP, announced plans to acquire a cloud-based newcomer, Concur Technologies, at a significant premium. We would not be surprised if investors benefit further as the old continues to meet the new in this way, particularly in the software industry.

Our focus is not entirely on younger, fast-growing firms, however, and we explained in our midyear letter that extended valuations for many of these stocks had led us to increase our emphasis on more mature, steadily growing companies—some heavy users of technology but not necessarily classified as tech firms. This rebalance paid off for us in several holdings, including media giant Liberty Global and credit card processor Visa. We had less satisfactory results from media firm Discovery Communications. While positioned better than many of its competitors for the emerging digital television market, the company was caught in the larger move away from TV by younger audiences. Our top contributor, LinkedIn, is an interesting blend of the young and the new. While a relatively young firm that has grown rapidly by exploiting the new use of social networking in the job market, the company also stands to enjoy steady growth from corporate recruiters, who pay licensing fees to access its database.

In our last letter, we warned that the high valuations of many of the best companies in our investment universe probably limited the potential for gains in the months ahead. In this light, our healthy 6.51% return over the past six months was perhaps somewhat better than what we might have expected. The uncertainty and volatility that engulfed tech shares and the broader market late in the year was a less welcome surprise, however. The worsening global economy, the sharp rise in the U.S. dollar, and the plunge in oil prices late in the year caused many tech investors to become more defensive and focus on the most established and deep-pocketed tech firms, many of which have a history of paying dividends.

Apple, with over $150 billion in its coffers, was a particularly strong performer in the market as the rollout of its iPhone 6 went better than many expected. Apple was also one of the fund’s top contributors for the year, but we eliminated our position before we could benefit from all of the stock’s appreciation. As we noted in our last letter, we do not see a large growth driver for the company—and it would have to be a massive one given Apple’s current valuation—beyond the iPhone 6. The company has been losing market share in tablets, and its efforts in the cloud, such as iRadio, have been disappointing. Generally, we think hardware-based firms such as Apple have less of a future as the locus of innovation moves to software and media firms.

More generally, while we have also become somewhat more defensive about valuations, we have resisted the temptation to react by looking backward and investing in firms that have been very successful but do not seem well positioned for the future. Instead, we have been focusing more on solid companies that should continue to grow as the economy decelerates, which seems likely. Google and Amazon.com are our two leading positions by some margin, together representing roughly one-quarter of the portfolio as of the end of the year. Both are dominant and well-positioned firms that we are confident will also have a firm footing in the technological landscape over the next decade. While many of these companies are based in the U.S., we are keeping a keen eye out for opportunities overseas. Our fourth-largest position as of year-end was Chinese media giant Tencent Holdings, which dominates the country’s huge market for mobile-phone delivery of media, social networking, and entertainment. As we noted in our midyear letter, we have been more traditionally defensive in our reduced exposure to the highly cyclical semiconductor industry, although we still see opportunities in the equipment firms that serve the industry.

Finally, we should note that we do not view our positioning as entirely defensive, and shareholders should be aware that a highly concentrated portfolio such as ours is likely to always prove more volatile than a broadly diversified fund. We are keeping some positions in companies with extraordinary long-term potential, but their high valuations relative to current earnings means that they are likely to be vulnerable to any change in sentiment. A leading example of such a holding is electric car manufacturer Tesla Motors. The falling price of gas has weighed on the stock recently, as investors correctly perceive that overall demand for electric vehicles will suffer in the short term. Several meetings with Tesla’s management and visits to its facilities have convinced us of the company’s less well-known advantages, primarily the speed of its software and engineering cycle. We believe Tesla will be better positioned than the major manufacturers to exploit the development of autonomous driving systems, which is likely to revolutionize the automotive market in the coming decades. Our outlook for Tesla has fluctuated, and we are not certain that Tesla will be able to execute successfully on its plans for a new SUV and mass-market sedan in the coming years. If it does, however, the potential stock appreciation is massive.

Sharp pullbacks in the stocks of many—although not all—fast-growing and leading companies in 2014 permitted us to refocus on the market leaders that we believe have the best long-term prospects. At the same time, we were able to harvest gains in several steady growth companies, such as Visa and Liberty Global, that had appealed to us as more attractively valued alternatives early in the year. Of course, not all our sales are for such happy reasons, and we are occasionally wrong about either the magnitude of incipient markets or the prospects of individual firms. We liquidated our poorly performing position in Pandora Media, for example, after it became clear to us that the online radio provider was spending away its profitability in an attempt to chase subscribers. While we had a better sense of the challenges facing pay television providers, we underestimated their scale. We significantly reduced Discovery Communications after it reported double-digit declines in viewership.

Although returns for global technology investors were neither strongly positive nor negative in 2014, this masked some notable dislocations in our market that brought with them a very high level of volatility. The episodic sell-offs later in the year did not offer as many attractive investment opportunities as we perceived following the tech tumble in the spring, but many were still substantial. One reason our fund handily outperformed its benchmarks early in the year was that we were able to successfully exploit chances to buy strong companies at prices that had suddenly become attractive again. Although our purchases and sales were mostly timely, we engaged in substantially more trading than I would prefer, and I anticipate that the portfolio’s level of turnover will decline considerably in the coming years. Due in part to substantial appreciation in some of our top holdings, the fund has also become more concentrated than is our goal. While we see great opportunities in these top positions—which is another reason they are so large—we are working to increase the fund’s diversification.

In general, I am very comfortable with the prospects of the companies in the portfolio, and I am more satisfied with the valuations of most of them than I was at the start of 2014. I am also confident in the investment process our global team has developed, which allows us to make the best use of the insights of our analysts in Baltimore, London, Hong Kong, Tokyo, Singapore, and elsewhere. I look forward to reporting to you on the results of our combined efforts in six months.

Joshua K. Spencer
President of the fund and chairman of its Investment Advisory Committee

The committee chairman has day-to-day responsibility for managing the portfolio and works with committee members in developing and executing the fund’s investment program.

Funds that invest only in specific industries will experience greater volatility than funds investing in a broad range of industries. Technology stocks have historically experienced unusually wide price swings, both up and down. The potential for wide variation in performance reflects the special risks common to companies in the rapidly changing field of technology. For example, products or services that at first appear promising may not prove commercially successful and may become obsolete quickly. Earnings disappointments and intense competition for market share can result in sharp price declines.

Lipper Global Science/Technology Funds Index: An index of science and technology mutual fund performance returns of funds that invest in technology companies around the world for specified periods as tracked by Lipper Inc.

MSCI All Country World Index Information Technology: An index that tracks information technology stocks in developed and emerging markets.

Note: MSCI makes no express or implied warranties or representations and shall have no liability whatsoever with respect to any MSCI data contained herein. The MSCI data may not be further redistributed or used as a basis for other indices or any securities or financial products. This report is not approved, reviewed, or produced by MSCI.

This chart shows the value of a hypothetical $10,000 investment in the fund over the past 10 fiscal year periods or since inception (for funds lacking 10-year records). The result is compared with benchmarks, which may include a broad-based market index and a peer group average or index. Market indexes do not include expenses, which are deducted from fund returns as well as mutual fund averages and indexes.

As a mutual fund shareholder, you may incur two types of costs: (1) transaction costs, such as redemption fees or sales loads, and (2) ongoing costs, including management fees, distribution and service (12b-1) fees, and other fund expenses. The following example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) of investing in the fund and to compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds. The example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the most recent six-month period and held for the entire period.

Actual Expenses
The first line of the following table (Actual) provides information about actual account values and expenses based on the fund’s actual returns. You may use the information on this line, together with your account balance, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number on the first line under the heading “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period.

Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes
The information on the second line of the table (Hypothetical) is based on hypothetical account values and expenses derived from the fund’s actual expense ratio and an assumed 5% per year rate of return before expenses (not the fund’s actual return). You may compare the ongoing costs of investing in the fund with other funds by contrasting this 5% hypothetical example and the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of the other funds. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period.

Note: T. Rowe Price charges an annual account service fee of $20, generally for accounts with less than $10,000. The fee is waived for any investor whose T. Rowe Price mutual fund accounts total $50,000 or more; accounts electing to receive electronic delivery of account statements, transaction confirmations, prospectuses, and shareholder reports; or accounts of an investor who is a T. Rowe Price Preferred Services, Personal Services, or Enhanced Personal Services client (enrollment in these programs generally requires T. Rowe Price assets of at least $100,000). This fee is not included in the accompanying table. If you are subject to the fee, keep it in mind when you are estimating the ongoing expenses of investing in the fund and when comparing the expenses of this fund with other funds.

You should also be aware that the expenses shown in the table highlight only your ongoing costs and do not reflect any transaction costs, such as redemption fees or sales loads. Therefore, the second line of the table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. To the extent a fund charges transaction costs, however, the total cost of owning that fund is higher.

T. Rowe Price Global Technology Fund, Inc. (the fund), is registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the 1940 Act) as a diversified, open-end management investment company. The fund commenced operations on September 29, 2000. The fund seeks to provide long-term capital growth.

Basis of Preparation The fund is an investment company and follows accounting and reporting guidance in the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Accounting Standards Codification Topic 946 (ASC 946). The accompanying financial statements were prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP), including but not limited to ASC 946. GAAP requires the use of estimates made by management. Management believes that estimates and valuations are appropriate; however, actual results may differ from those estimates, and the valuations reflected in the accompanying financial statements may differ from the value ultimately realized upon sale or maturity.

Investment Transactions, Investment Income, and Distributions Income and expenses are recorded on the accrual basis. Dividends received from mutual fund investments are reflected as dividend income; capital gain distributions are reflected as realized gain/loss. Dividend income and capital gain distributions are recorded on the ex-dividend date. Income tax-related interest and penalties, if incurred, would be recorded as income tax expense. Investment transactions are accounted for on the trade date. Realized gains and losses are reported on the identified cost basis. Distributions to shareholders are recorded on the ex-dividend date. Distributions from REITs are initially recorded as dividend income and, to the extent such represent a return of capital or capital gain for tax purposes, are reclassified when such information becomes available. Income distributions are declared and paid annually. Capital gain distributions, if any, are generally declared and paid by the fund annually.

Currency Translation Assets, including investments, and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies are translated into U.S. dollar values each day at the prevailing exchange rate, using the mean of the bid and asked prices of such currencies against U.S. dollars as quoted by a major bank. Purchases and sales of securities, income, and expenses are translated into U.S. dollars at the prevailing exchange rate on the date of the transaction. The effect of changes in foreign currency exchange rates on realized and unrealized security gains and losses is reflected as a component of security gains and losses.

Rebates Subject to best execution, the fund may direct certain security trades to brokers who have agreed to rebate a portion of the related brokerage commission to the fund in cash. Commission rebates are reflected as realized gain on securities in the accompanying financial statements and totaled $100,000 for the year ended December 31, 2014.

New Accounting Guidance In June 2014, FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2014-11, Transfers and Servicing (Topic 860), Repurchase-to-Maturity Transactions, Repurchase Financings, and Disclosures. The ASU changes the accounting for certain repurchase agreements and expands disclosure requirements related to repurchase agreements, securities lending, repurchase-to-maturity and similar transactions. The ASU is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2014. Adoption will have no effect on the fund’s net assets or results of operations.

The fund’s financial instruments are valued and its net asset value (NAV) per share is computed at the close of the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), normally 4 p.m. ET, each day the NYSE is open for business.

Fair Value The fund’s financial instruments are reported at fair value, which GAAP defines as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The T. Rowe Price Valuation Committee (the Valuation Committee) has been established by the fund’s Board of Directors (the Board) to ensure that financial instruments are appropriately priced at fair value in accordance with GAAP and the 1940 Act. Subject to oversight by the Board, the Valuation Committee develops and oversees pricing-related policies and procedures and approves all fair value determinations. Specifically, the Valuation Committee establishes procedures to value securities; determines pricing techniques, sources, and persons eligible to effect fair value pricing actions; oversees the selection, services, and performance of pricing vendors; oversees valuation-related business continuity practices; and provides guidance on internal controls and valuation-related matters. The Valuation Committee reports to the Board; is chaired by the fund’s treasurer; and has representation from legal, portfolio management and trading, operations, and risk management.

Various valuation techniques and inputs are used to determine the fair value of financial instruments. GAAP establishes the following fair value hierarchy that categorizes the inputs used to measure fair value:

Level 1 – quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical financial instruments that the fund can access at the reporting date

Level 2 – inputs other than Level 1 quoted prices that are observable, either directly or indirectly (including, but not limited to, quoted prices for similar financial instruments in active markets, quoted prices for identical or similar financial instruments in inactive markets, interest rates and yield curves, implied volatilities, and credit spreads)

Observable inputs are developed using market data, such as publicly available information about actual events or transactions, and reflect the assumptions that market participants would use to price the financial instrument. Unobservable inputs are those for which market data are not available and are developed using the best information available about the assumptions that market participants would use to price the financial instrument. GAAP requires valuation techniques to maximize the use of relevant observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs. When multiple inputs are used to derive fair value, the financial instrument is assigned to the level within the fair value hierarchy based on the lowest-level input that is significant to the fair value of the financial instrument. Input levels are not necessarily an indication of the risk or liquidity associated with financial instruments at that level but rather the degree of judgment used in determining those values.

Valuation Techniques Equity securities listed or regularly traded on a securities exchange or in the over-the-counter (OTC) market are valued at the last quoted sale price or, for certain markets, the official closing price at the time the valuations are made. OTC Bulletin Board securities are valued at the mean of the closing bid and asked prices. A security that is listed or traded on more than one exchange is valued at the quotation on the exchange determined to be the primary market for such security. Listed securities not traded on a particular day are valued at the mean of the closing bid and asked prices for domestic securities and the last quoted sale or closing price for international securities.

For valuation purposes, the last quoted prices of non-U.S. equity securities may be adjusted to reflect the fair value of such securities at the close of the NYSE. If the fund determines that developments between the close of a foreign market and the close of the NYSE will, in its judgment, materially affect the value of some or all of its portfolio securities, the fund will adjust the previous quoted prices to reflect what it believes to be the fair value of the securities as of the close of the NYSE. In deciding whether it is necessary to adjust quoted prices to reflect fair value, the fund reviews a variety of factors, including developments in foreign markets, the performance of U.S. securities markets, and the performance of instruments trading in U.S. markets that represent foreign securities and baskets of foreign securities. The fund may also fair value securities in other situations, such as when a particular foreign market is closed but the fund is open. The fund uses outside pricing services to provide it with quoted prices and information to evaluate or adjust those prices. The fund cannot predict how often it will use quoted prices and how often it will determine it necessary to adjust those prices to reflect fair value. As a means of evaluating its security valuation process, the fund routinely compares quoted prices, the next day’s opening prices in the same markets, and adjusted prices.

Actively traded domestic equity securities generally are categorized in Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy. Non-U.S. equity securities generally are categorized in Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy despite the availability of quoted prices because, as described above, the fund evaluates and determines whether those quoted prices reflect fair value at the close of the NYSE or require adjustment. OTC Bulletin Board securities, certain preferred securities, and equity securities traded in inactive markets generally are categorized in Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.

Investments in mutual funds are valued at the mutual fund’s closing NAV per share on the day of valuation and are categorized in Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy. Assets and liabilities other than financial instruments, including short-term receivables and payables, are carried at cost, or estimated realizable value, if less, which approximates fair value.

Thinly traded financial instruments and those for which the above valuation procedures are inappropriate or are deemed not to reflect fair value are stated at fair value as determined in good faith by the Valuation Committee. The objective of any fair value pricing determination is to arrive at a price that could reasonably be expected from a current sale. Financial instruments fair valued by the Valuation Committee are primarily private placements, restricted securities, warrants, rights, and other securities that are not publicly traded.

Subject to oversight by the Board, the Valuation Committee regularly makes good faith judgments to establish and adjust the fair valuations of certain securities as events occur and circumstances warrant. For instance, in determining the fair value of an equity investment with limited market activity, such as a private placement or a thinly traded public company stock, the Valuation Committee considers a variety of factors, which may include, but are not limited to, the issuer’s business prospects, its financial standing and performance, recent investment transactions in the issuer, new rounds of financing, negotiated transactions of significant size between other investors in the company, relevant market valuations of peer companies, strategic events affecting the company, market liquidity for the issuer, and general economic conditions and events. In consultation with the investment and pricing teams, the Valuation Committee will determine an appropriate valuation technique based on available information, which may include both observable and unobservable inputs. The Valuation Committee typically will afford greatest weight to actual prices in arm’s length transactions, to the extent they represent orderly transactions between market participants; transaction information can be reliably obtained; and prices are deemed representative of fair value. However, the Valuation Committee may also consider other valuation methods such as market-based valuation multiples; a discount or premium from market value of a similar, freely traded security of the same issuer; or some combination. Fair value determinations are reviewed on a regular basis and updated as information becomes available, including actual purchase and sale transactions of the issue. Because any fair value determination involves a significant amount of judgment, there is a degree of subjectivity inherent in such pricing decisions, and fair value prices determined by the Valuation Committee could differ from those of other market participants. Depending on the relative significance of unobservable inputs, including the valuation technique(s) used, fair valued securities may be categorized in Level 2 or 3 of the fair value hierarchy.

Valuation Inputs The following table summarizes the fund’s financial instruments, based on the inputs used to determine their fair values on December 31, 2014:

There were no material transfers between Levels 1 and 2 during the year ended December 31, 2014.

Following is a reconciliation of the fund’s Level 3 holdings for the year ended December 31, 2014. Gain (loss) reflects both realized and change in unrealized gain/loss on Level 3 holdings during the period, if any, and is included on the accompanying Statement of Operations. The change in unrealized gain/loss on Level 3 instruments held at December 31, 2014, totaled $2,634,000 for the year ended December 31, 2014. Transfers into and out of Level 3 are reflected at the value of the financial instrument at the beginning of the period. During the year, transfers out of Level 3 were because observable market data became available for the security.

Consistent with its investment objective, the fund engages in the following practices to manage exposure to certain risks and/or to enhance performance. The investment objective, policies, program, and risk factors of the fund are described more fully in the fund’s prospectus and Statement of Additional Information.

Restricted Securities The fund may invest in securities that are subject to legal or contractual restrictions on resale. Prompt sale of such securities at an acceptable price may be difficult and may involve substantial delays and additional costs.

Other Purchases and sales of portfolio securities other than short-term securities aggregated $3,113,132,000 and $2,776,179,000, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2014.

No provision for federal income taxes is required since the fund intends to continue to qualify as a regulated investment company under Subchapter M of the Internal Revenue Code and distribute to shareholders all of its taxable income and gains. Distributions determined in accordance with federal income tax regulations may differ in amount or character from net investment income and realized gains for financial reporting purposes. Financial reporting records are adjusted for permanent book/tax differences to reflect tax character but are not adjusted for temporary differences.

The fund files U.S. federal, state, and local tax returns as required. The fund’s tax returns are subject to examination by the relevant tax authorities until expiration of the applicable statute of limitations, which is generally three years after the filing of the tax return but which can be extended to six years in certain circumstances. Tax returns for open years have incorporated no uncertain tax positions that require a provision for income taxes.

Reclassifications to paid-in capital relate primarily to a tax practice that treats a portion of the proceeds from each redemption of capital shares as a distribution of taxable net investment income or realized capital gain. Reclassifications between income and gain relate primarily to the offset of the current net operating loss against realized gains. For the year ended December 31, 2014, the following reclassifications were recorded to reflect tax character (there was no impact on results of operations or net assets):

Distributions during the years ended December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, were characterized for tax purposes as follows:

At December 31, 2014, the tax-basis cost of investments and components of net assets were as follows:

The difference between book-basis and tax-basis net unrealized appreciation (depreciation) is attributable to the deferral of losses from wash sales for tax purposes.

The fund is managed by T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc. (Price Associates), a wholly owned subsidiary of T. Rowe Price Group, Inc. (Price Group). The investment management agreement between the fund and Price Associates provides for an annual investment management fee, which is computed daily and paid monthly. The fee consists of an individual fund fee, equal to 0.45% of the fund’s average daily net assets, and a group fee. The group fee rate is calculated based on the combined net assets of certain mutual funds sponsored by Price Associates (the group) applied to a graduated fee schedule, with rates ranging from 0.48% for the first $1 billion of assets to 0.275% for assets in excess of $400 billion. The fund’s group fee is determined by applying the group fee rate to the fund’s average daily net assets. At December 31, 2014, the effective annual group fee rate was 0.29%.

In addition, the fund has entered into service agreements with Price Associates and two wholly owned subsidiaries of Price Associates (collectively, Price). Price Associates computes the daily share price and provides certain other administrative services to the fund. T. Rowe Price Services, Inc., provides shareholder and administrative services in its capacity as the fund’s transfer and dividend-disbursing agent. T. Rowe Price Retirement Plan Services, Inc., provides subaccounting and recordkeeping services for certain retirement accounts invested in the fund. For the year ended December 31, 2014, expenses incurred pursuant to these service agreements were $120,000 for Price Associates; $702,000 for T. Rowe Price Services, Inc.; and $71,000 for T. Rowe Price Retirement Plan Services, Inc. The total amount payable at period-end pursuant to these service agreements is reflected as Due to Affiliates in the accompanying financial statements.

The fund may invest in the T. Rowe Price Reserve Investment Fund, the T. Rowe Price Government Reserve Investment Fund, or the T. Rowe Price Short-Term Reserve Fund (collectively, the Price Reserve Investment Funds), open-end management investment companies managed by Price Associates and considered affiliates of the fund. The Price Reserve Investment Funds are offered as short-term investment options to mutual funds, trusts, and other accounts managed by Price Associates or its affiliates and are not available for direct purchase by members of the public. The Price Reserve Investment Funds pay no investment management fees.

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of
T. Rowe Price Global Technology Fund, Inc.

In our opinion, the accompanying statement of assets and liabilities, including the portfolio of investments, and the related statements of operations and of changes in net assets and the financial highlights present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of T. Rowe Price Global Technology Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”) at December 31, 2014, the results of its operations, the changes in its net assets and the financial highlights for each of the periods indicated therein, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. These financial statements and financial highlights (hereafter referred to as “financial statements”) are the responsibility of the Fund’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits. We conducted our audits of these financial statements in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits, which included confirmation of securities at December 31, 2014 by correspondence with the custodian and brokers, and confirmation of the underlying fund by correspondence with the transfer agent, provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

We are providing this information as required by the Internal Revenue Code. The amounts shown may differ from those elsewhere in this report because of differences between tax and financial reporting requirements.

For taxable non-corporate shareholders, $4,473,000 of the fund’s income represents qualified dividend income subject to a long-term capital gains tax rate of not greater than 20%.

For corporate shareholders, $3,273,000 of the fund’s income qualifies for the dividends-received deduction.

A description of the policies and procedures used by T. Rowe Price funds and portfolios to determine how to vote proxies relating to portfolio securities is available in each fund’s Statement of Additional Information. You may request this document by calling 1-800-225-5132 or by accessing the SEC’s website, sec.gov.

The description of our proxy voting policies and procedures is also available on our website, troweprice.com. To access it, click on the words “Social Responsibility” at the top of our corporate homepage. Next, click on the words “Conducting Business Responsibly” on the left side of the page that appears. Finally, click on the words “Proxy Voting Policies” on the left side of the page that appears.

Each fund’s most recent annual proxy voting record is available on our website and through the SEC’s website. To access it through our website, follow the above directions to reach the “Conducting Business Responsibly” page. Click on the words “Proxy Voting Records” on the left side of that page, and then click on the “View Proxy Voting Records” link at the bottom of the page that appears.

The fund files a complete schedule of portfolio holdings with the Securities and Exchange Commission for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year on Form N-Q. The fund’s Form N-Q is available electronically on the SEC’s website (sec.gov); hard copies may be reviewed and copied at the SEC’s Public Reference Room, 100 F St. N.E., Washington, DC 20549. For more information on the Public Reference Room, call 1-800-SEC-0330.

Your fund is overseen by a Board of Directors (Board) that meets regularly to review a wide variety of matters affecting or potentially affecting the fund, including performance, investment programs, compliance matters, advisory fees and expenses, service providers, and business and regulatory affairs. The Board elects the fund’s officers, who are listed in the final table. At least 75% of the Board’s members are independent of T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc. (T. Rowe Price), and its affiliates; “inside” or “interested” directors are employees or officers of T. Rowe Price. The business address of each director and officer is 100 East Pratt Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21202. The Statement of Additional Information includes additional information about the fund directors and is available without charge by calling a T. Rowe Price representative at 1-800-638-5660.

The registrant has adopted a code of ethics, as defined in Item 2 of Form N-CSR, applicable to its principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer or controller, or persons performing similar functions. A copy of this code of ethics is filed as an exhibit to this Form N-CSR. No substantive amendments were approved or waivers were granted to this code of ethics during the period covered by this report.

The registrant’s Board of Directors/Trustees has determined that Mr. Anthony W. Deering qualifies as an audit committee financial expert, as defined in Item 3 of Form N-CSR. Mr. Deering is considered independent for purposes of Item 3 of Form N-CSR.

(a) – (d) Aggregate fees billed for the last two fiscal years for professional services rendered to, or on behalf of, the registrant by the registrant’s principal accountant were as follows:

Audit fees include amounts related to the audit of the registrant’s annual financial statements and services normally provided by the accountant in connection with statutory and regulatory filings. Audit-related fees include amounts reasonably related to the performance of the audit of the registrant’s financial statements and specifically include the issuance of a report on internal controls and, if applicable, agreed-upon procedures related to fund acquisitions. Tax fees include amounts related to services for tax compliance, tax planning, and tax advice. The nature of these services specifically includes the review of distribution calculations and the preparation of Federal, state, and excise tax returns. All other fees include the registrant’s pro-rata share of amounts for agreed-upon procedures in conjunction with service contract approvals by the registrant’s Board of Directors/Trustees.

(e)(1) The registrant’s audit committee has adopted a policy whereby audit and non-audit services performed by the registrant’s principal accountant for the registrant, its investment adviser, and any entity controlling, controlled by, or under common control with the investment adviser that provides ongoing services to the registrant require pre-approval in advance at regularly scheduled audit committee meetings. If such a service is required between regularly scheduled audit committee meetings, pre-approval may be authorized by one audit committee member with ratification at the next scheduled audit committee meeting. Waiver of pre-approval for audit or non-audit services requiring fees of a de minimis amount is not permitted.

(2) No services included in (b) – (d) above were approved pursuant to paragraph (c)(7)(i)(C) of Rule 2-01 of Regulation S-X.

(f) Less than 50 percent of the hours expended on the principal accountant’s engagement to audit the registrant’s financial statements for the most recent fiscal year were attributed to work performed by persons other than the principal accountant’s full-time, permanent employees.

(g) The aggregate fees billed for the most recent fiscal year and the preceding fiscal year by the registrant’s principal accountant for non-audit services rendered to the registrant, its investment adviser, and any entity controlling, controlled by, or under common control with the investment adviser that provides ongoing services to the registrant were $2,283,000 and $1,691,000, respectively.

(h) All non-audit services rendered in (g) above were pre-approved by the registrant’s audit committee. Accordingly, these services were considered by the registrant’s audit committee in maintaining the principal accountant’s independence.

(a) Not applicable. The complete schedule of investments is included in Item 1 of this Form N-CSR.

Item 7. Disclosure of Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures for Closed-End Management Investment Companies.

Item 9. Purchases of Equity Securities by Closed-End Management Investment Company and Affiliated Purchasers.

(a) The registrant’s principal executive officer and principal financial officer have evaluated the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures within 90 days of this filing and have concluded that the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective, as of that date, in ensuring that information required to be disclosed by the registrant in this Form N-CSR was recorded, processed, summarized, and reported timely.

(b) The registrant’s principal executive officer and principal financial officer are aware of no change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s second fiscal quarter covered by this report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

(a)(1) The registrant’s code of ethics pursuant to Item 2 of Form N-CSR is attached.

(2) Separate certifications by the registrant's principal executive officer and principal financial officer, pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and required by Rule 30a-2(a) under the Investment Company Act of 1940, are attached.

(3) Written solicitation to repurchase securities issued by closed-end companies: not applicable.

(b) A certification by the registrant's principal executive officer and principal financial officer, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and required by Rule 30a-2(b) under the Investment Company Act of 1940, is attached.

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Company Act of 1940, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

T. Rowe Price Global Technology Fund, Inc.

	By	/s/ Edward C. Bernard
		Edward C. Bernard
		Principal Executive Officer

Date February 13, 2015

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Company Act of 1940, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

	By	/s/ Edward C. Bernard
		Edward C. Bernard
		Principal Executive Officer

Date February 13, 2015


	By	/s/ Gregory K. Hinkle
		Gregory K. Hinkle
		Principal Financial Officer

Date February 13, 2015

●	$232,274,000 from short-term capital gains,

●	$145,365,000 from long-term capital gains, subject to a long-term capital gains tax rate of not greater than 20%

Name
(Year of Birth)
Year Elected*
[Number of T. Rowe Price		Principal Occupation(s) and Directorships of Public Companies and
Portfolios Overseen]		Other Investment Companies During the Past Five Years

William R. Brody, M.D., Ph.D.		President and Trustee, Salk Institute for Biological Studies (2009 to
(1944)		present); Director, BioMed Realty Trust (2013 to present); Director,
2009		Novartis, Inc. (2009 to present); Director, IBM (2007 to present)
[165]

Anthony W. Deering		Chairman, Exeter Capital, LLC, a private investment firm (2004 to
(1945)		present); Director, Brixmor Real Estate Investment Trust (2012 to
2001		present); Director and Member of the Advisory Board, Deutsche
[165]		Bank North America (2004 to present); Director, Under Armour
		(2008 to present); Director, Vornado Real Estate Investment Trust
		(2004 to 2012)

Donald W. Dick, Jr.		Principal, EuroCapital Partners, LLC, an acquisition and management
(1943)		advisory firm (1995 to present)
2000
[165]

Bruce W. Duncan		President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director, First Industrial Realty
(1951)		Trust, owner and operator of industrial properties (2009 to present);
2013		Chairman of the Board (2005 to present), Interim Chief Executive
[165]		Officer (2007), and Director, Starwood Hotels & Resorts, a hotel and
		leisure company (1999 to present)

Robert J. Gerrard, Jr.		Advisory Board Member, Pipeline Crisis/Winning Strategies, a
(1952)		collaborative working to improve opportunities for young African
2012		Americans (1997 to present); Chairman of Compensation Committee
[165]		and Director, Syniverse Holdings, Inc., a provider of wireless voice
		and data services for telecommunications companies (2008 to 2011)

Karen N. Horn		Limited Partner and Senior Managing Director, Brock Capital Group,
(1943)		an advisory and investment banking firm (2004 to present); Director,
2003		Eli Lilly and Company (1987 to present); Director, Simon Property
[165]		Group (2004 to present); Director, Norfolk Southern (2008 to present)

Paul F. McBride		Former Company Officer and Senior Vice President, Human
(1956)		Resources and Corporate Initiatives, Black & Decker Corporation
2013		(2004 to 2010)
[165]

Cecilia E. Rouse, Ph.D.		Dean, Woodrow Wilson School (2012 to present); Professor and
(1963)		Researcher, Princeton University (1992 to present); Director, MDRC,
2012		a nonprofit education and social policy research organization
[165]		(2011 to present); Member, National Academy of Education (2010
		to present); Research Associate, National Bureau of Economic
		Research’s Labor Studies Program (2011 to present); Member,
		President’s Council of Economic Advisors (2009 to 2011); Chair
		of Committee on the Status of Minority Groups in the Economic
		Profession, American Economic Association (2012 to present)

John G. Schreiber		Owner/President, Centaur Capital Partners, Inc., a real estate
(1946)		investment company (1991 to present); Cofounder and Partner,
2001		Blackstone Real Estate Advisors, L.P. (1992 to present); Director,
[165]		General Growth Properties, Inc. (2010 to 2013); Director, BXMT
		(formerly Capital Trust, Inc.), a real estate investment company
		(2012 to present); Director and Chairman of the Board, Brixmor
		Property Group, Inc. (2013 to present); Director, Hilton Worldwide
		(2013 to present)

Mark R. Tercek		President and Chief Executive Officer, The Nature Conservancy (2008
(1957)		to present); Managing Director, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
2009		(1984 to 2008)
[165]

*Each independent director serves until retirement, resignation, or election of a successor.

Name
(Year of Birth)
Year Elected*
[Number of T. Rowe Price		Principal Occupation(s) and Directorships of Public Companies and
Portfolios Overseen]		Other Investment Companies During the Past Five Years

Edward C. Bernard		Director and Vice President, T. Rowe Price; Vice Chairman of the
(1956)		Board, Director, and Vice President, T. Rowe Price Group, Inc.;
2006		Chairman of the Board, Director, and President, T. Rowe Price
[165]		Investment Services, Inc.; Chairman of the Board and Director,
		T. Rowe Price Retirement Plan Services, Inc., and T. Rowe Price
		Services, Inc.; Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer,
		and Director, T. Rowe Price International; Chairman of the Board,
		Chief Executive Officer, Director, and President, T. Rowe Price Trust
		Company; Chairman of the Board, all funds

Brian C. Rogers, CFA, CIC		Chief Investment Officer, Director, and Vice President, T. Rowe Price;
(1955)		Chairman of the Board, Chief Investment Officer, Director, and Vice
2006		President, T. Rowe Price Group, Inc.; Vice President, T. Rowe Price
[111]		Trust Company

*Each inside director serves until retirement, resignation, or election of a successor.

Officers

Name (Year of Birth)
Position Held With Global Technology Fund		Principal Occupation(s)

Kennard W. Allen (1977)		Vice President, T. Rowe Price and T. Rowe Price
Vice President		Group, Inc.

Darrell N. Braman (1963)		Vice President, Price Hong Kong, Price
Vice President		Singapore, T. Rowe Price, T. Rowe Price Group,
		Inc., T. Rowe Price International, T. Rowe Price
		Investment Services, Inc., and T. Rowe Price
		Services, Inc.

Christopher W. Carlson (1967)		Vice President, T. Rowe Price and T. Rowe Price
Vice President		Group, Inc.

David J. Eiswert, CFA (1972)		Vice President, T. Rowe Price, T. Rowe Price
Vice President		Group, Inc., and T. Rowe Price International

Henry M. Ellenbogen (1973)		Vice President, T. Rowe Price, T. Rowe Price
Vice President		Group, Inc., and T. Rowe Price Trust Company

Roger L. Fiery III, CPA (1959)		Vice President, Price Hong Kong, Price
Vice President		Singapore, T. Rowe Price, T. Rowe Price Group,
		Inc., T. Rowe Price International, and T. Rowe
		Price Trust Company

John R. Gilner (1961)		Chief Compliance Officer and Vice President,
Chief Compliance Officer		T. Rowe Price; Vice President, T. Rowe Price
		Group, Inc., and T. Rowe Price Investment
		Services, Inc.

Gregory S. Golczewski (1966)		Vice President, T. Rowe Price and T. Rowe Price
Vice President		Trust Company

Paul D. Greene II (1978)		Vice President, T. Rowe Price and T. Rowe Price
Vice President		Group, Inc.

Gregory K. Hinkle, CPA (1958)		Vice President, T. Rowe Price, T. Rowe Price
Treasurer		Group, Inc., and T. Rowe Price Trust Company

Rhett K. Hunter (1977)		Vice President, T. Rowe Price and T. Rowe Price
Vice President		Group, Inc.

Patricia B. Lippert (1953)		Assistant Vice President, T. Rowe Price and
Secretary		T. Rowe Price Investment Services, Inc.

Heather K. McPherson, CPA (1967)		Vice President, T. Rowe Price and T. Rowe Price
Vice President		Group, Inc.

Tobias F. Mueller (1980)		Vice President, T. Rowe Price Group, Inc., and
Vice President		T. Rowe Price International; formerly intern,
		T. Rowe Price (to 2011)

David Oestreicher (1967)		Director, Vice President, and Secretary, T. Rowe
Vice President		Price Investment Services, Inc., T. Rowe Price
		Retirement Plan Services, Inc., T. Rowe
		Price Services, Inc., and T. Rowe Price Trust
		Company; Chief Legal Officer, Vice President,
		and Secretary, T. Rowe Price Group, Inc.; Vice
		President and Secretary, T. Rowe Price and
		T. Rowe Price International; Vice President,
		Price Hong Kong and Price Singapore

Hiroaki Owaki, CFA (1962)		Vice President, T. Rowe Price Group, Inc. and
Vice President		T. Rowe Price International

Deborah D. Seidel (1962)		Vice President, T. Rowe Price, T. Rowe Price
Vice President		Group, Inc., T. Rowe Price Investment Services,
		Inc., and T. Rowe Price Services, Inc.

Michael F. Sola, CFA (1969)		Vice President, T. Rowe Price and T. Rowe Price
Vice President		Group, Inc.

Joshua K. Spencer, CFA (1973)		Vice President, T. Rowe Price and T. Rowe Price
President		Group, Inc.

Julie L. Waples (1970)		Vice President, T. Rowe Price
Vice President

Thomas H. Watson (1977)		Vice President, T. Rowe Price and T. Rowe Price
Vice President		Group, Inc.

Justin P. White (1981)		Vice President, T. Rowe Price and T. Rowe Price
Vice President		Group, Inc.

Alison Mei Ling Yip (1966)		Vice President, Price Hong Kong and T. Rowe
Vice President		Price Group, Inc.

Unless otherwise noted, officers have been employees of T. Rowe Price or T. Rowe Price International for at least 5 years.