Fair value is the price that would be received from selling an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. When determining fair value, we consider the principal or most advantageous market in which we would transact, and we consider assumptions that market participants would use when pricing the asset or liability. Our financial assets and liabilities are measured and recorded at fair value, except for equity method investments, cost method investments, cost method loans receivable, and most of our liabilities.

The three levels of inputs that may be used to measure fair value are as follows:

Level 2. Observable inputs other than Level 1 prices, such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities, quoted prices in less active markets, or model-derived valuations in which all significant inputs are observable or can be derived principally from or corroborated with observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities. Level 2 inputs also include non-binding market consensus prices that can be corroborated with observable market data, as well as quoted prices that were adjusted for security-specific restrictions.

Level 3. Unobservable inputs to the valuation methodology that are significant to the measurement of the fair value of assets or liabilities. Level 3 inputs also include non-binding market consensus prices or non-binding broker quotes that we were unable to corroborate with observable market data.

Marketable debt instruments include instruments such as commercial paper, corporate bonds, government bonds, bank deposits, asset-backed securities, municipal bonds, and money market fund deposits. When we use observable market prices for identical securities that are traded in less active markets, we classify our marketable debt instruments as Level 2. When observable market prices for identical securities are not available, we price our marketable debt instruments using non-binding market consensus prices that are corroborated with observable market data; quoted market prices for similar instruments; or pricing models, such as a discounted cash flow model, with all significant inputs derived from or corroborated with observable market data. Non-binding market consensus prices are based on the proprietary valuation models of pricing providers or brokers. These valuation models incorporate a number of inputs, including non-binding and binding broker quotes; observable market prices for identical or similar securities; and the internal assumptions of pricing providers or brokers that use observable market inputs and, to a lesser degree, unobservable market inputs. We corroborate non-binding market consensus prices with observable market data using statistical models when observable market data exists. The discounted cash flow model uses observable market inputs, such as LIBOR-based yield curves, currency spot and forward rates, and credit ratings.

Our marketable debt instruments that are classified as Level 3 are classified as such due to the lack of observable market data to corroborate either the non-binding market consensus prices or the non-binding broker quotes. When observable market data is not available, we corroborate our fair value measurements using non-binding market consensus prices and non-binding broker quotes from a second source.

Assets and liabilities measured and recorded at fair value on a recurring basis consisted of the following types of instruments as of September 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011:

		September 29, 2012								December 31, 2011
		Fair Value Measured and								Fair Value Measured and
		Recorded at Reporting Date Using								Recorded at Reporting Date Using
(In Millions)		Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total		Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
Assets
Cash equivalents:
	Bank deposits	$	—	$	637	$	—	$	637	$	—	$	795	$	—	$	795
	Commercial paper		—		1,449		—		1,449		—		2,408		—		2,408
	Government bonds		—		50		—		50		650		—		—		650
	Money market fund deposits		434		—		—		434		546		—		—		546
Short-term investments:
	Bank deposits		—		438		—		438		—		196		—		196
	Commercial paper		—		1,216		—		1,216		—		1,409		—		1,409
	Corporate bonds		35		273		29		337		120		428		28		576
	Government bonds		352		140		—		492		2,690		310		—		3,000
Trading assets:
	Asset-backed securities		—		—		81		81		—		—		115		115
	Bank deposits		—		183		—		183		—		135		—		135
	Corporate bonds		533		509		—		1,042		202		486		—		688
	Commercial paper		—		174		—		174		—		305		—		305
	Government bonds		1,439		1,257		—		2,696		1,698		1,317		—		3,015
	Money market fund deposits		53		—		—		53		49		—		—		49
	Municipal bonds		—		233		—		233		—		284		—		284
Other current assets:
	Derivative assets		—		164		4		168		—		159		7		166
	Loans receivable		—		200		—		200		—		33		—		33
Marketable equity securities			3,920		4		—		3,924		522		40		—		562
Other long-term investments:
	Asset-backed securities		—		—		13		13		—		—		36		36
	Bank deposits		—		56		—		56		—		55		—		55
	Corporate bonds		58		141		40		239		—		282		39		321
	Government bonds		59		102		—		161		177		300		—		477
Other long-term assets:
	Derivative assets		—		27		25		52		—		34		29		63
	Loans receivable		—		569		—		569		—		715		—		715
Total assets measured and
	recorded at fair value	$	6,883	$	7,822	$	192	$	14,897	$	6,654	$	9,691	$	254	$	16,599

Liabilities
Other accrued liabilities:
	Derivative liabilities	$	—	$	211	$	2	$	213	$	—	$	280	$	8	$	288
Long-term debt			—		—		128		128		—		—		131		131
Other long-term liabilities:
	Derivative liabilities		—		15		—		15		—		27		—		27
Total liabilities measured and
	recorded at fair value	$	—	$	226	$	130	$	356	$	—	$	307	$	139	$	446

Government bonds include bonds issued or deemed to be guaranteed by government entities. Government bonds include instruments such as non-U.S. government bonds, U.S. Treasury securities, and U.S. agency securities.

During the first nine months of 2012, approximately $250 million of government bonds and corporate bonds were transferred from Level 1 to Level 2 primarily based on the reduced market activity for the underlying securities. Our policy is to reflect transfers in and transfers out at the beginning of the quarter in which a change in circumstances resulted in the transfer.

We elected the fair value option for loans made to third parties when the interest rate or foreign exchange rate risk was hedged at inception with a related derivative instrument. As of September 29, 2012, the fair value of our loans receivable for which we elected the fair value option did not significantly differ from the contractual principal balance based on the contractual currency. These loans receivable are classified within other current assets and other long-term assets. Fair value is determined using a discounted cash flow model with all significant inputs derived from or corroborated with observable market data. Gains and losses from changes in fair value on the loans receivable and related derivative instruments, as well as interest income, are recorded in interest and other, net. During all periods presented, changes in the fair value of our loans receivable were largely offset by changes in the related derivative instruments, resulting in an insignificant net impact on our consolidated condensed statements of income. Gains and losses attributable to changes in credit risk are determined using observable credit default spreads for the issuer or comparable companies and were insignificant during all periods presented. We did not elect the fair value option for loans when the interest rate or foreign exchange rate risk was not hedged at inception with a related derivative instrument.

We elected the fair value option for the bonds issued in 2007 by the Industrial Development Authority of the City of Chandler, Arizona (2007 Arizona bonds). In connection with the 2007 Arizona bonds, we entered into a total return swap agreement that effectively converts the fixed-rate obligation on the bonds to a floating U.S.-dollar LIBOR-based rate. As a result, changes in the fair value of this debt are largely offset by changes in the fair value of the total return swap agreement, without the need to apply hedge accounting provisions. The 2007 Arizona bonds are included in long-term debt. As of September 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, no other instruments were similar to the 2007 Arizona bonds for which we elected fair value treatment.

As of September 29, 2012, the fair value of the 2007 Arizona bonds did not significantly differ from the contractual principal balance. The fair value of the 2007 Arizona bonds was determined using inputs that are observable in the market or that can be derived from or corroborated with observable market data, as well as unobservable inputs that were significant to the fair value measurement. Gains and losses on the 2007 Arizona bonds and the related total return swap are recorded in interest and other, net. We capitalize a portion of the interest associated with the 2007 Arizona bonds; the remaining interest is recorded as interest expense in interest and other, net.

Our non-marketable equity investments (non-marketable equity method and cost method investments) and non-financial assets, such as intangible assets and property, plant and equipment, are recorded at fair value only if an impairment charge is recognized.

A portion of our non-marketable equity investments was measured and recorded at fair value due to events or circumstances that significantly impacted the fair value of those investments, resulting in other-than-temporary impairment charges. We classified these measurements as Level 3, as we used unobservable inputs to the valuation methodologies that were significant to the fair value measurements, and the valuations required management judgment due to the absence of quoted market prices. Impairment charges recognized on non-marketable equity investments held as of September 29, 2012 were $19 million during the third quarter of 2012 and $88 million during the first nine months of 2012 (impairment charges recognized on non-marketable equity investments held as of October 1, 2011 were $12 million during the third quarter of 2011 and $33 million during the first nine months of 2011). The fair value of these non-marketable equity investments that were impaired during the first nine months of 2012 was $51 million at the time of impairment ($53 million for non-marketable equity investments impaired during the first nine months of 2011).

We measure the fair value of our non-marketable cost method investments, indebtedness carried at amortized cost, and cost method loans receivable quarterly; however, the assets are recorded at fair value only when an impairment charge is recognized. The carrying amounts and fair values of certain financial instruments not recorded at fair value on a recurring basis as of September 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011 were as follows:

	September 29, 2012
	Carrying		Fair Value Measured Using						Fair
(In Millions)	Amount		Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Value
Non-marketable cost method investments	$	1,128	$	—	$	—	$	1,697	$	1,697
Loans receivable	$	207	$	—	$	150	$	56	$	206
Long-term debt	$	6,972	$	5,500	$	2,942	$	—	$	8,442
NVIDIA Corporation cross-license agreement liability	$	870	$	—	$	889	$	—	$	889

	December 31, 2011
	Carrying		Fair Value Measured Using						Fair
(In Millions)	Amount		Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Value
Non-marketable cost method investments	$	1,129	$	—	$	—	$	1,861	$	1,861
Loans receivable	$	132	$	—	$	132	$	—	$	132
Long-term debt	$	6,953	$	5,287	$	2,448	$	—	$	7,735
Short-term debt	$	200	$	—	$	200	$	—	$	200
NVIDIA Corporation cross-license agreement liability	$	1,156	$	—	$	1,174	$	—	$	1,174

As of September 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, the unrealized loss position of our non-marketable cost method investments was insignificant.

Our non-marketable equity investments are valued using the market and income approaches. The market approach includes the use of financial metrics and ratios of comparable public companies. The selection of comparable companies requires management judgment and is based on a number of factors, including comparable companies' sizes, growth rates, industries, development stages, and other relevant factors. The income approach includes the use of a discounted cash flow model, which requires the following significant estimates for the investee: revenue, costs, and discount rates based on the risk profile of comparable companies. Estimates of revenues and costs are developed using available market, historical, and forecast data. The valuation of these non-marketable equity investments also takes into account variables such as conditions reflected in the capital markets, recent financing activities by the investees, the investees' capital structure, the terms of the investees' issued interests, and the lack of marketability of the investments.

The carrying amount and fair value of loans receivable exclude loans measured and recorded at a fair value of $769 million as of September 29, 2012 ($748 million as of December 31, 2011). The carrying amount and fair value of long-term debt exclude long-term debt measured and recorded at a fair value of $128 million as of September 29, 2012 ($131 million as of December 31, 2011). Short-term debt includes our commercial paper outstanding as of December 31, 2011, and the carrying amount and fair value exclude drafts payable.

The fair value of our loans receivable, including those held at fair value, is determined using a discounted cash flow model, with all significant inputs derived from or corroborated with observable market data, such as LIBOR-based yield curves, currency spot and forward rates, and credit ratings. The credit quality of our loans receivable remains high, with credit ratings of A/A2 or better for most of our loans receivable as of September 29, 2012. Our long-term debt recognized at amortized cost is comprised of our senior notes and our convertible debentures. The fair value of our senior notes is determined using active market prices, and is thereby classified as Level 1. The fair value of our convertible long-term debt is determined using discounted cash flow models with observable market inputs and takes into consideration variables such as risk-free rate, comparable securities, subordination discount, credit-rating changes, and interest rate changes.

The NVIDIA Corporation cross-license agreement liability in the preceding table was incurred as result of entering into a long-term patent cross-license agreement with NVIDIA in January 2011. We agreed to make payments to NVIDIA over six years. As of September 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, the carrying amount of the liability arising from the agreement was classified within other accrued liabilities and other long-term liabilities, as applicable. The fair value is determined using a discounted cash flow model, which discounts future cash flows using our incremental borrowing rates.